AuthorMartin Hladík

Driving is a relatively straightforward activity. You need to follow the rules and keep track of changes happening on the road, especially on highways. However, you need to know all the rules in a specific county, and in some parts of the world, that may be a little difficult. Because laws in certain countries about driving range from unconventional to downright bizarre. So, let us look at some of them and try to explain them – if possible:

Philippines– Is My Number Today?

Most drivers are okay with random numbers that make regular, non-customized license plates. That is because those numbers cannot influence which days they can drive their car. Unless you live in the Philippines. All vehicles are separated into categories based on how the numbers on the license plate end. Each category is forbidden to drive during peak hours one day a week. For example, plates ending with 1 or 2 are prohibited from driving on Monday between 7–10 AM and 3–7 PM. The same goes for plates ending in 3 and 4 on Tuesday, 5 or 6 on Wednesday, and you can guess the rest. The government introduced the law to reduce the number of cars during rush hours.

Russia – Cleaning Is My Business

Rain and mud can make your car look like a rolling cube of dirt and dust. While keeping your vehicle clean is essential for both safety and aesthetics, in Russia, forgetting to keep it scrubbed can earn you a fine of around 2000 Rubles (close to 36 AUD). The government passed it to prevent license plates from being covered up mud and salt during the winter months. Also, you have to keep your car clean both inside and outside. When you consider that the only places that you’re allowed to wash the car are designated car wash facilities and homes, it’s no wonder that many Russians tend to store their cars during winter months when driving is not just messy but also challenging.

Australia– Splash And Wave Another Day

Rain and dirt can influence how you use your car in other ways. It is illegal to splash mud on the people leaving or entering the bus stations and people standing at the bus stop in Australia. So, pay attention when passing next to public transportation stops in bad weather. Also, trying to look cool by sticking any part of the limb outside the window can earn you a fine. You can only do that if you are trying to signal other drivers. If you need to appear at court in New South Wales because of such an offence, you can always check out criminal lawyers in Sydney. Fortunately, there are plenty of reviews, and you should be able to pick and choose depending on your specific situation.

Cyprus – Grab That Wheel

Summer drives can be exhausting, especially when you need to keep yourself hydrated during driving. Well, in Cyprus, you will need to stop if you need to quench your thirst. Law states that it is illegal to take your hands off the wheel for any reason. The fine for doing that is around 138 AUD. The number of accidents increased significantly on the island in the last couple of years, so the law aims to reduce it.

If you’re hungry, you cannot hold a sandwich in one hand and drive with another. Resting hands is also prohibited for the driver. If your companions feel the sudden need to eat or drink, do not risk the fine if you want to join them. Stop at the first appropriate place and enjoy nature as well as the meal.

USA – Obligatory Usage Of Car Horns

If you ever wanted to drive blindfolded, then avoid the state of Alabama. It’s not only illegal, it’s incredibly dangerous and reckless. On the other hand, if you want to drive along with a sheep in the car, steer clear of Montana. Or at least find a chaperone to keep an eye on it, as it is considered an offence to have a sheep in the cab of a truck without someone keeping an eye on it. And if car horns give you hives, avoid New Jersey at all costs. By law, residents must honk as a warning before passing other cars heading in the same direction.

By Peter Minkoff

Peter is a lifestyle and travel writer at Men-Ual magazine, living between Ústí nad Labem and Antwerp. Follow Peter on Twitter for more tips.

A False Sense of Security in the Private Sector
as a Warning Sign and Means to Assess the Effectiveness of Cyber Security Awareness Measures

In today’s world, no organization or enterprise is completely safe from cyber-attacks or their possible consequences. In fact, one may even argue that the effects of Cyber Security incidents on our increasingly interconnected world have the potential to negatively affect every single individual on this planet. As a result, and aided by a progressively complex landscape of regulatory and legal requirements in this field and beyond, raising awareness of Cyber Security threats and, by extension, building Cyber Resilience, have developed from a traditionally rather technical matter into an increasingly important strategic topic for businesses, on the one hand, and into a critical diplomatic challenge for States, on the other hand.

The EU Network and Information Security Directive was the first piece of EU-wide Cyber Security legislation and aims to enhance Cyber Security across the EU. The national supervision of critical sectors, such as energy, transport, water, health, and critical digital service providers, including online market places, as well as the enhancement of national Cyber Security capabilities and facilitation of cross-border collaboration, are the key topics covered by the NIS Directive. Moreover, the NIS Directive is part of the EU Cyber Security Strategy, which states “achieving Cyber Resilience” as one of its five priorities. However, the fact that the NIS Directive was only adopted in 2016, with a deadline for national transposition by EU member States as recent as May 9, 2018, illustrates that Cyber Security and Cyber Resilience are relatively new topics in international collaborative efforts surrounding security and stability in Europe. One may argue that this recency inherently implies a certain lack of preparation for Cyber Security incidents; thus, vulnerability.

“The technology of today serves not only a Weberian predictability imperative – to further rationalise society. It makes society less safe and its individuals less free” – recently stated my former professor Anis H. Bajrektarevic discussing the EU cyber-related legislation. Hence, a preparation, in other words – strategic investment in preventative measures and resources, is considered an essential aspect of Cyber Security as well as critical to Cyber Resilience. While Cyber Security is primarily concerned with the protection of information technology and systems, Cyber Resilience aims to ensure the effective continuation of an organizations operations and to prevent demobilization of business- or organization-critical functions in the event of security incidents. To be more specific, it is “the ability to prepare for, respond to and recover from cyber attacks” and other security incidents, such as data breaches, that is commonly referred to as Cyber Resilience.

In this context, it has been argued that the creation of a resilience-conscious culture is a key element of successful Cyber Resilience strategies. Creating such a cyber resilient culture involves raising awareness of Cyber Security threats, such as phishing and malware, and communicating ways to minimize risks stemming from them to people outside of Cyber Security functions. The main goal here is to facilitate a cyber resilient mindset through awareness-building measures, leading to the question: If promoting awareness of Cyber Security threats ultimately enhances Cyber Resilience, how can we, first of all, assess the status quo of Europe’s Cyber Resilience and subsequently, monitor the progress and effectiveness of such awareness building measures, in order to better understand, compare and ultimately enhance the Cyber Resilience of individual States and Europe in its entirety?

This essay will argue that “a false sense of security” in the private sector is a warning sign regarding the Cyber Resilience of States, hence, a warning sign regarding the status quo of Europe’s Cyber Resilience. Moreover, it will argue that “a false sense of security” can serve as a valuable indicator for the effectiveness of, and increased need for Cyber Security awareness measures. This will be accomplished through the following approach:

Firstly, the essential need for and feasibility of active preparation for seemingly unlikely crisis situations, will be emphasized. To illustrate this point, the controversy surrounding the classification of the COVID-19 pandemic as “black swan event” will be discussed. Secondly, the discussion of several recent Cyber Security related incidents and their implications, will highlight that businesses and governments worldwide must, more than ever, and especially due to the C-19 related acceleration of digitalization, improve their Cyber Resilience. The main goal here will be to draw attention to the worldwide existing deficiencies regarding Cyber Resilience and, based on this, illustrate the need for and value of finding new ways to assess Cyber Resilience, but also key aspects of Cyber Resilience. Thirdly, current insights from the recently published study “Cyber Security in Austria” will be discussed and contrasted with the respective risk assessment from The Global Risks Report 2019 to illustrate apparent discrepancies in security related self-perception in the private sector versus the reality of the risk situation. It is important to note here that “a false sense of security” means feeling safe in an unsafe environment. Therefore, such discrepancies represent “a false sense of security”. As a final step, possible implications and limitations of the presented ideas will be discussed.

A black swan event is an unpredictable, highly improbable and rare event that has serious and potentially catastrophic consequences. One main characteristic of black swan events is the widespread insistence that their occurrence was obvious in hindsight; thus, should have been foreseen. In the recent past, this concept, which the Lebanese-American philosopher, professor and former Wall Street trader, Nassim Nicholas Taleb, developed and already described in 2007, has, in connection with the C-19 pandemic, again become a topic of conversation – not least because of social media, such as Twitter (#blackswan). While there seems to be general disagreement as to whether the ongoing C-19 pandemic constitutes a “real” black swan event, Taleb himself stated in an interview that the eventual outbreak of a global pandemic with all its consequences was, in fact, a predictable “white swan” event, arguing that companies, corporations and especially governments, had no excuse, not to be prepared.

Regardless of swan color, however, in connection with the aforementioned ability to prepare for cyber attacks, it can be argued that a particularly relevant consequence of the C-19 pandemic, in terms of Cyber Security and subsequently, security in Europe, has been the acceleration of digitalization throughout the world, affecting the public and private sector, as well as the private sphere of people’s homes. Exit restrictions and other social-distancing measures imposed by governments worldwide, in an effort to curb the spread of the virus, have caused the global demand for remote working technologies to skyrocket within a remarkably short period of time. For example, the video conferencing solution provider Zoom experienced, within just a few weeks, a surge from around 10 million daily active users at the end of December 2019, to over 200 million daily active users in March 2020. It was not long before data privacy and data security related problems with Zoom became apparent: “Zoom bombing” or video hijacking, which refers to the unwanted and disruptive intrusion of a person into a Zoom video meeting, a lack of end-to-end encryption and, in this regard, misleading information advertised on part of the provider, along with various IT security related vulnerabilities that allowed hackers, among other things, unauthorized remote access to end user’s Mac computers – including webcam and microphone access, Zoom’s deployment of in-app surveillance features, as well as questionable handling and alleged trade with the obtained user data were, already by April 2020, seen as a considerable cause for concern, leading security experts to describe Zoom as “a privacy disaster”, and “fundamentally corrupt”. Moreover, Arvind Narayanan, associate computer science professor at Princeton University, was quoted as saying: “Zoom is malware”. The most memorable piece of news concerning Zoom was, however, arguably about the British prime minister Boris Johnson accidentally posting sensitive information, including the Zoom meeting ID and the login names of several participants, when sharing a screenshot of his first-ever digital cabinet meeting via Twitter.

The example of Zoom illustrates how companies, organizations, governments and private individuals benefit to an unprecedented extent from the advantages of digitalization, especially in the context of the ongoing C-19 pandemic, but also beyond such global crisis situations, while at the same time being faced with the considerable challenges and security risks brought about by the new technologies of what is known as the Fourth Industrial Revolution. This Fourth Industrial Revolution, being “characterized by a fusion of technologies that is blurring the lines between the physical, digital, and biological spheres”, is changing the ways we live, work and interact, resulting in significant risks to the privacy of natural persons, as well as to security and stability in general.

Several recently occurring or publicly emerging Cyber Security incidents underpin the scope of these risks: A cyber-attack on the British airline EasyJet, in the course of which personal data including email addresses and travel plans of 9 million EasyJet customers and additionally, credit card details of over 2,000 customers, were stolen, became known in May 2020. This once again demonstrates that companies of all kinds can at all times become targets and victims of cyber-attacks. Costly penalties for violations of the General Data Protection Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (GDPR), as well as claims for damages and lawsuits by those affected and, last but not least, the loss of reputation often caused by such security incidents, pose significant challenges for companies under any circumstances. These challenges can, however, easily become existence-threatening, especially in view of the C-19 induced crisis situation, in which particularly the aviation industry currently finds itself in, as recently highlighted, when Austrian Airlines received EUR 450 million in financial aid from the Austrian government.

On the one hand, the EasyJet security incident illustrates that Cyber Resilience has, in recent years, developed from a formerly predominantly technical matter into a business-critical strategic topic and, in today’s world, competitive advantage for companies, whereas on the other hand, the case of Austrian Airlines requiring millions of Euros of state aid to continue their operations, illustrates how crisis situations faced by private companies can and do affect States.

As a matter of fact, we live in a time where the vulnerability of critical infrastructure is a real concern among security specialists and States, as illustrated by the following example: A joint memo, sent out in May 2020 by German intelligence and security agencies, warned German operators of critical infrastructure against hacker attacks. The memo included a description of the hackers’ approach as well as information indicating long-standing compromises in corporate networks of companies operating in the energy, water and telecommunications sector, in other words, critical sectors covered by the EU Network and Information Security Directive 2016/1148 (NIS).

It is in light of security incidents like these, that the results of and contradictions arising from this year’s “Cyber Security isn Austria” study (KPMG, 2020), may be perceived as especially worrying: According to the study, 27% of 652 companies surveyed place great trust in their Cyber Security measures, while 58% “rather” trust their Cyber Security measures. At the same time, 57% of participating companies became victims of cyber attacks in the past 12 months, of which 74% where phishing attacks. It is important to note here, that, when it comes to the prevention of phishing attacks, security experts consider regularly training employees on security awareness, essential. In the context of such Cyber Security awareness measures, it seems especially interesting that the study highlighted the significance of employees in the detection of cyber attacks, as opposed to merely focusing on employees as a potential weakness: 79% of companies stated that they had become aware of a cyber attack through their own employees, while internal security systems ranked second (72%) as a means of detection. Awareness building measures must, therefore, remain a high priority for companies.

Furthermore, the study established that one third of companies believe it would take them 1 to 4 weeks to safely remove attackers from their systems, while a fourth of companies even believe it would merely take them between 2 and 6 days. These findings are in direct contradiction with the considerably longer and demonstrably increasing average “dwell time” (100 to 170 days) of attackers in corporate networks. Regarding Cyber Resilience, it is worth noting here, that although 69% of companies surveyed invest in awareness and security monitoring to protect themselves against cyber attacks, only 25% prepare for possible damage through cyber insurance coverage. Also, the study found that 82% of companies would like to see established a government agency dedicated exclusively to Cyber Security issues and 77% would like to be supported more by the State, while at the same time, 57% state that they do not trust the authorities when it comes to Cyber Security. Additionally, it was found that the primary expectation (64% of companies) companies have toward the State is the provision of information and EU-wide support as well as exchange between experts from the State and private sector, in order to learn from each other. Considering the companies’ expectations regarding the exchange of information between experts, it seems particularly striking that about 90% declined to comment on the effects that past Cyber Security incidents had in terms of damage caused to their reputation. Based on this finding, it was concluded that a trustful exchange of information must be encouraged and observed, that changes to the existing legal framework would help facilitate open communication on cybercrime.

All in all, it was concluded that Austrian companies mistrust others, but do not protect themselves sufficiently, that they demand cooperation, however, shy away from open communication and that they feel more secure than they are. In other words, “a false sense of security” in the Austrian private sector, emerged as a key finding.

It was already established earlier that “a false sense of security” means feeling safe in an unsafe environment. Therefore, it seems only logical to look in more detail at the threat environment, also known as risk environment, in which businesses in today’s world operate in. For the sake of coherence and comparability, the following section will, first of all, examine Austria’s situation before briefly considering the global risk environment:

The “Risks of Doing Business 2019” report (World Economic Forum) rates cyber-attacks as the most critical business risk in Austria (46.7%) and data fraud or theft as second critical (34.1%). Taking into account the previously discussed findings regarding levels of trust companies place in their security measures (27% trust “greatly”, 58% “rather” trust) and unrealistic company estimates of attacker “dwell time” in corporate networks, “a false sense of security” clearly reemerges. The top Risks of Doing Business 2019 on a global scale are fiscal crises (28.9%), closely followed by cyber attacks (28.2%) as the second critical risk and unemployment or underemployment (28.2%) as the third critical risk, while data fraud or theft ranks seventh (22.4%), firmly establishing technological risks among the most critical risks globally.

Overall, and especially against the background of the global risk environment and increasing interconnectedness of the public and private sector, “a false sense of security”, or to be more precise, “a false sense of Cyber Security” in the private sector must, therefore, be considered a significant threat for the security of private companies and, consequently, the security in Europe, a warning sign regarding the status quo of Europe’s Cyber Resilience and, one may argue, valuable instrument in assessing the effectiveness of Cyber Security awareness measures.

While the scope and purpose of this essay did not allow for an in-depth analysis of how “a false sense of security” may practically be translated into a quantifiable, clearly defined key performance or risk indicator, it may serve as a starting point in doing so. Also, it may rightfully be argued that any indicator of performance or risk must be evaluated in the context of already established key performance and risk indicators, as well as existing efforts, procedures and best practices in the field, in order to fully assess its value and usefulness. Again, the scope of this essay did not allow for an in-depth analysis in this regard. Nevertheless, it may prove useful as a starting point in doing so. Other limitations and challenges arising from the scope, purpose and choice of approach as well as ideas advanced in this essay, include the risk of bias when generalizing from Austria to Europe and the risk of response bias (demand bias) when utilizing survey questions to identify “a false sense of security” with the same participants.

Nevertheless, despite these limitations, it seems possible to derive the following conclusions from the analysis conducted in this essay: a) the security and stability in Europe depend on the ability of States to continuously improve and maintain their Cyber Resilience, b) Europe’s Cyber Resilience is closely tied to the Cyber Resilience of each States’ private sector and, as a result, the actors operating within them, c) improving cooperation and trust between the public and the private sector as well as between States is necessary to improve Europe’s Cyber Resilience and, d) an organization with the appropriate authority, financial and professional capacity as well as reach, such as, one may argue, the OSCE, must act as the initiator and governing body of projects aiming to utilize “a false sense of security” to assess Europe’s Cyber Resilience and existing security awareness measures.

All in all, one may conclude that in order to ensure and enhance security and stability in Europe in our increasingly interconnected world, especially in the face of rapid technological progress, new technologies and the recent acceleration of digitalization, an urgent need to continuously improve and monitor Europe’s Cyber Resilience exists. This will call for more and more cooperation between the public and private sector, as well as between States and will, consequently, likely even heighten the significance of international organizations, such as the OSCE, in initiating, financing, overseeing and supporting Cyber Resilience initiatives in Europe.

About the Author:

Julia Wurm is a Vienna-based specialist in cyber security and the EU cyber legislation.

Tourism has been one of the hardest-hit industries by the coronavirus crisis. In the Czech Republic, which is a popular tourist destination, the tourist sector employs a quarter of a million people and brings significant revenues to state coffers. In a video-conference on Tuesday the government agency CzechTourism presented its long-term strategy for reviving this all-important sector.

Tourism revenues in the Czech Republic last year amounted to 300 billion crowns, making up 3 percent of the GDP. This year, as a result of the pandemic, the industry is struggling to survive. The head of CzechTourism Jan Herget says the damage is overwhelming.

“The impact of the pandemic has been brutal. Revenues this year will drop by 53 percent to 139 billion crowns, in Prague revenues are down by 80 percent, putting 200,000 jobs on the line, not just in the tourist industry itself, but in related professions such as bakeries or cleaners.”

Read the rest of the story here.

Author: Daniela Lazarová

As we all sat home reeling this spring, videos began making the rounds: a rooftop DJ in Rome and a balcony accordionist in Sicily, nonnas teaching pasta-making from their small towns and widows in Siena starting singalongs from their windows. Amid the overwhelming emotions of the spring, a taste of that irrepressible Italian spirit was just what we all needed—a tonic for the soul. Italy has been a beloved destination for generations, and this year, we were reminded of why that is. It felt only right to name Italy our 2021 Destination of the Year. Here’s hoping we can all get there in 2021.

See all the tips here.

COVID-19 pandemic shows a negative effect on the Czechs’ physical and mental health. Citizens started gaining weight, smoking and getting more depressed, the results of the November survey by Mutumut insurance and EMA Data with 500 respondents shows.

In the last seven months of quarantine, Czechs have had less physical activity, which led to a third of the respondents gaining weight. 30 percent gained 5 kg while 13 percent gained 10 kg.

“COVID-19 is known to be much worse for people who are significantly overweight or obese,” stated Jindřich Lenz, the CEO of Mutumut.

Respondents under the age of 25 stopped exercising following the closure of gyms and swimming pools. Some of them work out at home, but not as actively as before. Lenz added that the most vulnerable group of people under 55 doesn’t work out either. Also, they don’t have an option to do sports activities outside because it’s getting colder.

Nearly half of the respondents started smoking more since the beginning of the lockdown. Five percent admitted to starting smoking even though they didn’t do it before the quarantine. Jiří Paták, the EMA data executive, however, added that people over 55 started smoking less.

Read the rest of the article here.

Author: Irina Nikolaeva

The number of mortgages taken out in the Czech Republic has reached record levels due to falling interest rates. October 2020 was the second-most successful month since 1993, when the Czech Republic was established – a record year in terms of volume is within grasp.

The volume of mortgages reached CZK 25.21 billion, according to data from Fincentrum Hypoindex, which has been keeping track of data from major banks and mortgage providers since 1993.

The average mortgage rate fell for the seventh month in a row. In October, the average rate approached the 2% mark by another five basis points, ending at 2.02%.

Read the rest of the article here.

Author: Raymond Johnston

The coronavirus pandemic may have shut Czech theatres for now but some Prague residents hungry for entertainment have found that watching a live performance can be as easy as grabbing a takeaway.

Prague troupe Cirk La Putyka has opened a “Culture Window” at a Prague marketplace building where an audience of up to four outside can watch a five-minute live show of music, acrobatics and dancing inside, while still observing social distancing rules.

The window, which opened on Tuesday for two nights of performances, draws its inspiration from pick-up windows for food orders at restaurants that have also been forced to shut dining spaces due to tighter restrictions to curb the spread of the coronavirus.

“This performance is for live culture addicts. They will get a dose of live culture here,” Cirk La Putyka director Rostislav Novak said.

The show starts after theatre staff lead the spectators to the window and a gong sounds to open the curtain.

Tickets for the bite-sized performances – offered for free although people are asked to donate to the group – quickly disappeared after going up on the group’s website.

Read more here.

Being married to someone you love and cherish can be an adventure of a lifetime. Some journeys, however, aren’t meant to last that lifetime, so it’s much healthier for all parties involved to go their separate ways. Yes, the decision to file for divorce can be heartbreaking and frustrating, and the paperwork behind it is tiresome, but if the end goal is your happiness and independence, and above all, a fresh start, then it’s absolutely worth it.

Still, people aren’t always certain that they’ll be happy with such a decision. It might seem grim, complicated, and overwhelming, so they might postpone the decision for years before they make up their mind. While getting divorced isn’t necessarily a “happy” occasion, it has all the potential to make you happy and provide you with what you need. Still having doubts? Here are several of the most typical positive effects of divorce, and why you should consider this step in your life when it’s time to move forward.

Providing a healthy space for your kids

If you and your spouse have kids, and you’ve been feeling that you’re not right for one another anymore, your kids are bound to get a sense of that mood in your home. When your emotions change, so does your relationships. In case your spouse has been aggressive towards you, or you’ve been abused, all the more reason to seek help and rebuild your life in a healthy environment for yourself and your kids.

Divorcing your spouse is the first step towards that healing process. Alone, but happy and content, you’ll be able to create a safe, healthy space for your little ones, and set an example for them that it’s never a bad time to stand up for yourself or your needs.

Standing up for yourself

A marriage doesn’t necessarily have to be abusive in order to make you unhappy. Many spouses begin to neglect their partners, or they drift apart. Perhaps you’ve evolved into completely different people, and today, you have nothing in common or you no longer love one another. Then again, infidelity is another typical reason for couples to get divorced.

Depending on where you live, the law will differ, as well as the resulting settlement, custody of your kids, and other details. In Australia, many couples will often look for an expert in family law in Sydney to make sure they get the best possible settlement, protect their rights, and make sure their kids are protected, too. More often than not, reaching the right middle ground for both you and your spouse, and the kids, requires professional guidance to navigate the intricate waters of your local family law.

Rebuilding and reclaiming your selfhood

In so many relationships, marriages included, people lose their sense of self and completely merge their own identity with that of their spouse. This is not something people do intentionally, but in doing so, they’ll also jeopardize their friendships as well as all of their personal relationships outside of their marriage.

A divorce might not sound like an ideal option at first, but if you’re not able to be your true self and continue evolving as an individual, then perhaps it’s time to jump ship. During and after divorce, you’ll be able to focus on yourself, learn how to love yourself once again, and get to know who you really are.

Boosting your wellbeing

In the months leading up to the divorce, you have been feeling stressed, agitated, sad, and overwhelmed, which is the most common scenario when you’re in a marriage in which you’re no longer fulfilled. Such a state of mind is bound to take a toll on your health and wellbeing, and the stress alone can affect your sleep schedule, eating habits, and your desire to be active and socialize.

That is why divorcing your spouse can be good for both. It will give you a healthy resolution to a life you’re not satisfied with, and you’ll finally be able to focus on your wellbeing, sans the stress.

Getting a divorce can be a cause for celebration, when you approach it with the right mindset and become mindful of all the perks that come with it. It’s inevitable to get stressed due to the process itself, and it can be difficult to face your fears and your reclaimed independence, but it will all be worth your while soon enough, when you take charge of your life, ready for new adventures!

By Peter Minkoff

Peter is a lifestyle and travel writer at Men-Ual magazine, living between Ústí nad Labem and Antwerp. Follow Peter on Twitter for more tips.

A school in a deprived area earns accolades for breaking down traditional barriers between educators, parents, and pupils.

“Where’s your mommy?” a school assistant asks two blond pupils in a school hallway. “She’s out partying,” a disheveled father answers on their behalf. He looks as if he’s just returned from a party himself.

It’s Saturday morning, the elementary school in Trmice is having its open house, and this anecdote serves as a good illustration of the state of things here.

Trmice, until 1994 part of the city of Usti nad Labem in northern Bohemia, is a small town with several socially disadvantaged areas and high unemployment, indebtedness, and lower-than- average educational achievement. A third of the students at the Trmice elementary school are Roma, a third have special educational needs, and a third come from an unsupportive home environment. And these groups overlap in various ways.

In the Usti nad Labem region, one in seven children leaves school prematurely. Socially disadvantaged areas account for almost two thirds of such children. But in Trmice such cases can be counted on one hand, and every year the number of those opting for areas of study leading to a diploma grows.

So how do they do it in Trmice? How does the school manage to push children who “aren’t motivated from home and don’t care much about anything” – as principal Marie Gottfriedova describes many of those at her school – toward further successful education?

Read the rest of the article here.

Political corruption in Lebanon traces its roots to the re-assembling in the post-civil war era, which entrenched a realm of politics dominated by war lords and militia-like mentalities operating through a sectarian discourse. The waste resulting from “confessional governance” costs Lebanon 9% of GDP each year.[2] In the early 1990s, “Lebanese political bosses either co-opted or gutted institutions such as unions, professional associations and opposition parties. Public schools and hospitals were defunded.” Today, many Lebanese do not send their children to public schools or hospitals. Sukleen, the company contracted by the government to collect waste in Beirut and Mount Lebanon charges 4x more per ton of waste disposed in landfills compared to providers in the UK.[3] Nearly 40% of electricity is produced by private generators established during the civil war and partially owned by various politicians today, profiting close to $1 billion a year. Electricite du Liban, the public electricity company collects payments for only half of the power it produces.[4]

Additionally, corruption and government inefficiency in collecting VAT has cost the state $5 billion a year, roughly 10% of GDP.[5] Historically known for its banking secrecy laws, 15 of 54 commercial Lebanese banks have politicians linked to their chair of the Board; four out of the top ten banks in the country possess over 70% of their shares due to crony capital, and individuals linked to political elites control 43% of assets in Lebanon’s commercial banking sector.[6] In Lebanon, 46% of government revenue is dedicated to public salaries, which increased 7.5% each year for the last ten years.[7] Thirty years of this crony, capitalist decadence has expanded inequality in the country with public debt skyrocketing, as well as visible incompetence to deliver on basic social services. As a result, the majority of Lebanese find it increasingly impossible to buy their way out of such a system.[8] In exploring corruption in Lebanon through the discourse employed by recent social mobilization in October of 2019 that defined and vilified its role in politics and social life, we can begin to understand how Lebanese define or perceive corruption and how the political elite both consolidate and perpetuate this structure.

Re-defining corruption

Sentiments expressed in the protest movement, affirm and greatly emphasize the notion of theft or “stolen money” or of resources not rightfully possessed as a primary component of corruption. As the revolution began to evolve, evidence emerged that various political leaders had withdrawn sums equivalent to billions of US dollars in the span of 15 days, presumably fearing the fallout of economic collapse.[9] This development was echoed by conversations surrounding the many public work contracts, electricity budget and government salaries that have systematically resulted in the theft of state funds. This pattern of corruption underscores not simply the mismanagement of government resources, but a reaction against the acquisition of something that does not rightfully belong to a person, with little to no consequences. These sorts of actions have permeated down from the political class to the daily interactions that guide society. This and countless conversations of this nature that occurred during my field work in December of 2019 and January, 2020 in Lebanon, including my discussion with Ayman Mhanna (executive director of the Samir Kassir foundation, a civil society organization dedicated to free press and democracy) in the summer of 2019 speak to this corrosion of trust both in political leaders, but also the system they operate in, which trickles down to quotidian experiences. An “every man for himself” mentality has fuelled and reproduced this notion of theft, in which at all levels, politician and citizen can or must take what is not theirs either to live how they desire or in order to survive respectively. However, this action is denoted as theft, because what is taken is not rightfully earned.

The reoccurring question of theft can also be extended beyond material needs. With many Lebanese paying dual public and private electricity and water bills, for private schools and their children forced to work or study abroad, this idea was often framed around conceptions of dignity, echoed in many uprisings in the region since 2011.[10] As this basic access to water, electricity, clean air, public transportation, and work has become increasingly harder and harder to come by, many Lebanese snapped under the mounting pressure, demanding their own dignity be recognized. Moreover, this dignity was deeply tied to the enormous brain drain currently plaguing the country, in which over 4,700 Lebanese continue to emigrate from Lebanon every month.[11] With opportunities dwindling both due to the economic situation, but also the theft of state money and inability to find work without wasta[12], the future of generations to come has also been stolen. This theft was veiled time and time again behind sectarian politics and attitudes, in which individuals’ leaders evade accountability but also squarely place the blame on their counterparts for political stalemates or acts of corruption. The effects of these sectarian politics were underscored by the current movement through graffiti on the ground in Riad el Solh square facing parliament in Beirut reading “corruption=sectarianism”. Finally, the symbiotic relationship between the political class, the private sector and the banks, particularly following the reconstruction of Lebanon after the civil war has produced a ruthless economic system that solely benefits political elites. Therefore, this structure is also perceived as a form of theft, and by extension corruption. Unpacking further the various symbols and organizing culture of this movement can help expand this understanding of these perceived links.

Public space and knowledge production

One of the most striking developments of the October 17th was the clear reclamation of public space and knowledge production. The reclaimed public spaces and transforming urban fabric challenged the agenda imposing a luxury oriented downtown Beirut catering to elites. Instead, the changing identity of this space now reflects the authority on the ground—the people. The discussions that took place in these spaces through unlikely gatherings of people were revolutionary because they were unprecedented in the post-war context. Without access to public space, such conversations proved impossible. Moreover, there was an observable reclamation of trust in the fellow citizen and a reclamation of solidarity through the use of public space previously denied to the Lebanese people as a means of social control. Now, the free exchange of ideas that threaten the established powers is possible. Though the protests of 2005, known as the Cedar Revolution calling for the withdrawal of Syrian forces mobilized close to a million people in Beirut, there were no substantial efforts to actively claim space through the occupation of cultural centres and the establishment of tents, lectures, street art etc. like the current movement The 2005 demonstrations had also reacted to the death of the then Prime Minister, Rafiq Hariri who was responsible for the elite nature of the downtown area that provides virtually no public space.

On New Year’s Eve, the movement organized a celebration in the downtown area, markedly different to the previous year where the municipality spent generous sums to maintain the glamorous image promoted by Solidere.[13] This year, however, the celebration proved to be far more “popular” in nature, focusing instead on the achievements of the movement thus far: the resignation of the sitting Prime Minister and a sense of national unity. During the evening, a recent acquaintance turned to me, offering another expression of identification with the space, saying that the atmosphere of working-class people enjoying the space is similar to how it was before the civil war. This anecdote does not bear importance for its veracity, particularly as this individual was not alive before the civil war. Rather, it speaks to a perception that something about the general order today had robbed people of a common space that was inviting of all backgrounds. Reclaiming this space in this way therefore is a direct rejection of the post war system and the authority legitimizing it on the ground. The public lectures and debates that had occurred in the first weeks of the revolution had shrunk significantly during the month I was present. However, across the interviews conducted, the various participants found that these initiatives created occasions for learning, a platform for self-expression, an opportunity to break up “bubbles” of typical confessional communities and to build cross-sectarian solidarity. As one interviewee added, spaces of Beirut felt more connected to her now, as she explored and ventured into neighbourhoods previously unknown to her in order to attend demonstrations.

Symbols, grievances and the politics of meaning

Notions of public space reclamation, knowledge production, the visible links between corruption, sectarianism and the neo-liberal, urban reconstruction and the cartel-like economy materialized in various symbols throughout the movement. Street art and graffiti were incredibly effective tools in expressing the views of the movement. Moreover, the significance of the location of the street art strategically highlighted the decadence of the elitist reconstruction project, out of touch with the social fabric. This art often focused on issues of social injustice, social renewal (a statue of the phoenix rising), calls for a civil state as opposed to a sectarian state (“civil resistance”), the end of foreign interference (from Iran to Saudi Arabia to the United States) as well as various references to the far left (graffitied communist symbols, the Kuffiyieh—a symbol of Palestinian liberation and of leftist resistance more broadly, “down with bankism and classism,” “love, freedom and social justice” “liberation” “f**k Solidere”). Moreover, this art served as another form of reclamation of this space. The artists and activists I interviewed asserted that this revolution would not have occurred at this point had Hariri “shared the wealth” with the Lebanese people, frequently referred to the political class as a set of cartels. During the “week of rage”, I repeatedly heard protestors singing a song entitled شيد قصورك or “Erect your castles on the farms,” a song by an Egyptian folk singer, known for composing political music sympathetic to working and oppressed classes. These images and sentiments were also reflected in chants outside the banking institutions: الوطن ، العمال تسقط سلطة رأس المال or “The nation, workers, down with the power of capital”

Many protestors from their balconies would bang pots and pans, a reference to the South American protest tactic, the cacerolazo. Perhaps a nod to an emerging global backlash against the many variations of this system around the world.

The locations and stops along marches and demonstrations also signified a rejection of extreme neoliberalism and the complicity of the financial system in the sectarianism and corruption of the state. Therefore, demonstrations typically became more targeted following the initial general mobilization, focusing on the banking districts, the Central bank and property of Solidere in the downtown area (Beirut Souks). Along the path of many marches, protestors would not revert to looting or thoughtless vandalism, but would smash the storefronts of banks to crystallize the message. One day during a walk towards downtown, I observed the occupation of a branch of Bank Audi in the neighbourhood of Achrafieh. People had gathered in the bank, demanding the right to withdraw their funds, which had been limited to 200USD per week by the Central Bank due to the dollar liquidity crisis. Contesting these restrictions, many stayed inside the bank until their demands would be met. They were locked inside the bank, with one man placing sticky notes on the glass doors to inform outside observers of what was happening. Some of the notes wrote that they were forced to stay inside, and another wrote they were “prisoners of capitalism.”

The movement also chose to demonstrate in front of the newly appointed Prime Minister’s home and would identify politicians in public, frequently shaming them out of establishments. The occupation of “the ring” highway, the original site dividing East and West Beirut during the civil war underscores a repudiation of typical sectarian divisions. The use of the communist symbol along with the prevalence of the Kuffiyeh further signified renunciation of the status quo. A divisive symbol associated with the pro-Palestinian, leftist and pan-Arab faction of the Lebanese civil war, now appears an almost non-issue in the context of the revolution. Instead, this symbol was reclaimed to no longer signify this division but rather calls for greater justice across all identities and communities. Finally, beyond grievances surrounding social injustice and inequality, their connection to the notion of dignity also revealed itself in these symbols.

Alterative exchanges and democratization of mobilization

After October 17th, the movement took a vested interest in promoting Lebanese products or alternative modes of commercial exchange, both as a form of reclamation against the exportation of human capital and importation of foreign goods, but also out of compulsion. In one interview conducted, the participant described her experience in founding an alternative market with fellow revolutionaries. In this market, a committee was formed to find ways to “make ends meet” in the current economic decline before structural changes occur and raising money for those in need in a sustainable fashion. These implied vendors would have the freedom to exchange goods and build their own markets outside the formal economy. Sometimes this implied an exchange of their goods as a sort of alternative currency. The products exchanged in this market ranged from books, clothes, hygiene products, food, post cards, jewellery etc. She affirmed this alternative market was created by protestors to support those in need— “not as charity in neo-liberal sense but as act of solidarity.” She stressed the revolutionary nature of this market, because she found that Lebanese are so unaccustomed to a culture of exchange, especially in this space. The market committee and vendors would often meet in the tents set up in the downtown area where various lectures and discussions had taken place. Despite some support from traditional civil society groups, this market proved to be an independent, grassroots and organic creation of the revolutionary moment. After running into a street child she had formed a bond within the early weeks of the revolution, she reiterated the importance of these horizontal exchanges claiming this allowed her to meet people she otherwise would never have interreacted with. This organizing nature of the market and various initiatives of the movement—diffused, horizontal, accessible—reflect Lebanese society in reality and embody its demands for greater equality and social justice in a system which continues to benefit a select few.

New alternative and independent media outlets also emerged (Akhbar el Seha, Megaphone, Daleel el Thawra etc.). These pages on Instagram and Facebook, served as a direct counter to the traditional, politically affiliated media outlets in the country, which often ignored events on the ground or vilified protestors. These pages offered live coverage, updates and summaries of daily events through a new base of journalists and activists, free of traditional political persuasions or financial connections, instead empowered by the democratic nature of social media and like-minded individuals. Informal and grassroots organizations led much of the movement, particularly as the movement progressed, signifying a dispersed and decentralized approach guided by common goals and common anger. With the perception that typical civil society actors proving to be ineffective, individuals or new groups became legitimate representatives of the people. This also led to a more organic expression of inter-regional solidarity. Therefore, the democratization and individualization of the revolution emboldened Lebanese to claim their rights and reclaim trust in their fellow citizen. The individual participating in the alternative market explained that pride in her identity would not link to a romantic nationalist notion but rather to a functional system. As a citizen with rights, this desire is what pushed her to act towards claiming these rights. Moreover, this process empowered new actors to lead.

Many of those I spoke to commented that typical civil society actors they expected to be organizing during this period were more timid in their approach, often hindered by inter-personal disagreements or as one interviewee said, their inability to tangibly defy state power and continued negotiation with the system. Moreover, unions and syndicates face increasing pressure in the Lebanese context and are unable to enact change as they did in Sudan or Tunisia. Traditional institutions of this nature function less effectively because they are consistently politicized. Consequently, this failure led many individuals to mobilize in new forms. The “week of rage” was called in order to protest the appointment of the new Prime Minister and the delay in government formation. This week of marches and demonstrations seemingly led by students, feminists, and leftist activists. However, no one organizer seemed to take credit in organizing the week, instead citing social media as largely responsible for simply spreading the word that something needed to be done. As the new context demanded alternative approaches, several individuals and grassroots entities became aware of their agency, the informal feminist, leftist and student networks rose to the fore to fill the gap.

The empowerment of non-traditional actors can also be exemplified in the mobilization and contribution of women in the movement. Mobilized women and feminist activists have played a central role in combatting the status quo, particularly motivated by the injustice of personal status laws permitting child marriage, severely disadvantaging them in the case of divorce and the current citizenship law. Women participating therefore issued demands for an end to these practices, protection of their reproductive rights, protection from violence and harassment as well as greater government representation and the termination of the Kafala system (recognizing the intersections between race and gender for migrant female workers subject to some of the highest forms of violence and abuse in the country).[14] The role of feminists in the mobilization is embedded in the rejection of corruption in this current iteration. As described by the activist working in the alternative market, the political system is corrupt, racist, sectarian, unaccountable, and patriarchal. For her, patriarchy is in and of itself corruption, because men are able to advance before women in all aspects of social and political life. The system, according to her claims to be neo-liberal and open but is in fact extremely illiberal in how it treats half of the population. Therefore, it came as no surprise to observe feminists’ organizers at every single protest, march and demonstration, calling for social justice through an intersectional lens and producing alternative media content.

These testimonies encouraged a sort of individualization and democratization of the mobilization since October, particularly because everyone possesses an issue at stake in the event of a transition. The discussions empowering individuals to take this step and to organize with like-minded individuals were made possible through public space reclamation. This recognition of individual agency lent itself to greater dialogue across cleavages in society normally unapproached. The sort of grassroots, broad-based and egalitarian nature of the mobilization efforts, therefore, serves as a manifesto and reflection of the grievances and desires of the movement—a Lebanon that is accountable, meritocratic, equal, fair, united against sectarian division and infantilization, and serves its citizens.

The sociological problematic and shifting mentalities

Dedicated protestors exhibited a liberation from this infantilization imposed on them by the state—the Zaim/Zu’ama or the political elite. Others noted that such a transition requires a revolution within, which they had begun to witness. An artist and activist I interviewed argued that they “must revolt against the father before (they) can revolt against the Zaim” because Lebanon possess a sociological problem that cannot be resolved in a top-down approach, beginning at the political level. Therefore, the mobilization of Lebanese appeared to be an organic demonstration of inter-regional solidarity, at least momentarily. A student activist I spoke to called this process the “death of the Zaim” and a revolution within oneself. Without this individual decision to question and revolutionize how they view governance, their identity and citizenship, they were unable to rid themselves of the dominance of the Zaim and go to the streets. The empowerment of individuals in this process of self-liberation reflects for some the unfettering from traditional bonds coercing political or communal loyalty. This transformation was illustrated across various individuals from different walks of life.

These events must not be considered universal or complete. Still, many individuals and generations are seeking to uphold the status quo, and the loyalists of the political class will not easily concede what remains of their power. The mobilization has been sustained by various age groups, sects, and classes. However, it has become clear that Shia support for the movement has dwindled, along with the support of the middle classes and the generation formed in the civil war.[15] Perhaps the rise of Sunni communities demonstrated by events occurring in Tripoli speaks to a reaction to a crisis of leadership rather than a total upheaval of the political and social system. Yet, one cannot dismiss that’s this popular movement has created unprecedented linkages across typical cleavages in Lebanese society in a manner that is diffused, more democratic, somehow anarchic, and in this way a rejection of the elite, unequal and corrupt post-war order.

Ljubljana/Paris, 29 October 2020

• Marie-Christine Ghreichi

Specialized in International Security with a

focus on Diplomacy and the Middle East Region

Footnotes:

[1] IFIMES – International Institute for Middle East and Balkan Studies, based in Ljubljana, Slovenia, has Special Consultative status at ECOSOC/UN, New York, since 2018.

[2] “Lebanon’s Political System Leads to Paralysis and Corruption.” The Economist, The Economist Newspaper, www.economist.com/middle-east-and-africa/2018/04/19/lebanons-political-system-leads-to-paralysis-and-corruption.

[3] “One Year on, Lebanon’s Waste Management Policies Still Stink.” PressReader.com – Your Favorite Newspapers and Magazines., www.pressreader.com/lebanon/the-daily-star-lebanon/20160915/281741268880633.

[4] McDowall, Angus. “Fixing Lebanon’s Ruinous Electricity Crisis.” Reuters, Thomson Reuters, 29 Mar. 2019, www.reuters.com/article/us-lebanon-economy-electricity/fixing-lebanons-ruinous-electricity-crisis-idUSKCN1RA24Z.; Nasnas, Roger. “Emerging Lebanon Towards Economic Growth and Social Welfare.” CES, www.ces.gov.lb/uploads/files/1570_Emerging%20Lebanon%20-%20Towards%20Economic%20Growth%20and%20Social%20Welfare%20.pdf.

[5] “Lebanon Economic Vision.” Economy.gov.lb, www.economy.gov.lb/media/11893/20181022-1228full-report-en.pdf. 600,613

[6] Chaaban, Jad. “I’ve Got the Power: Mapping Connections between Lebanon’s Banking Sector and the Ruling Class.” Economic Research Forum. 2016.

[7] Lebanon Economic Vision.” Economy.gov.lb, www.economy.gov.lb/media/11893/20181022-1228full-report-en.pdf.

[8] El-Amine, Rayan, et al. “The Lebanese People Are Reclaiming Their Future. Can They Seize It?” Middle East Eye, www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/how-lebanese-people-are-reclaiming-their-future.

[9] Al Jazeera. “Lebanon: Banks Asked to Review Politicians’ Fund Transfers Abroad.” News | Al Jazeera, Al Jazeera, 16 Jan. 2020, www.aljazeera.com/ajimpact/lebanon-banks-asked-review-politicians-fund-transfers-200116162617641.html.

[10] Lebanese citizens have long suffered from an inconsistent supply of certain public services, including water and electricity. Electricity is provided publicly to citizens in Lebanon, but at most will be available for two thirds of the day. Many Lebanese have reverted to private power generators, whose sellers are typically supported by politicians, who supply homes with power using the official pubic distribution networks in exchange for monthly subscription fees. Due to the mismanagement by the government and the damage done to water systems following the 2006 war, most Lebanese receive water from their municipalities intermittently and often water that is contaminated. As a result, most are forced to pay two bills, one for municipal water and one for bottled water or some other private source, often associated with a particular political leader. Such trends manifest themselves in the provision of practically all social services in the country.

[11] “Over 4,700 Lebanese Are Emigrating from #Lebanon Every Month.” Blog Baladi, blogbaladi.com/over-4700-lebanese-are-immigrating-every-month/.

[12] The term Wasta, loosely translates to an individual who finds themselves in the middle, between two actors or parties. This term more specifically, is used to refer to the use of one’s connections for personal gain. Western readings of Wasta often denote this concept as a manifestation of nepotism and for some, corruption. Wasta may include corrupt acts, but also captures a larger phenomenon in Middle Eastern societies. Some instances of Wasta are in fact legal. Such practices additionally, may be legally questionable but are in fact systematic, socially acceptable modes of behaviour. Wasta is not a top down business but is diffused across society.

[13] Solidere is a firm that was partially owned by the late Rafik Hariri, the Prime Minister in the 1990s, tasked with planning and reconstructing Beirut’s central district. He centred his approach of the reconstruction on foreign investment and business interests. Yet, his approach allowed the warlords of the civil war to exploit the reconstruction economy. Additionally, Hariri focused largely on creating a “modern” and luxurious downtown rather than investing in infrastructure, transportation, hospitals or schools.

[14] « Under the country’s kafala (or sponsorship) system, the legal status of migrant domestic workers is in the hands of their employers. If the employer terminates their contract, the sponsorship gets automatically cancelled, turning these workers into illegal aliens and putting them at risk of arrest and/or deportation. In addition, although confiscating passports is forbidden by law, such violations continue to occur. In effect, this means that foreign workers, most of whom are women, have very little means to defend themselves should the employer abuse them in any way or refuse to pay their salary. “The Lebanese Revolution Must Abolish the Kafala System.” Middle East | Al Jazeera, Al Jazeera, 14 Nov. 2019, www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/lebanese-revolution-abolish-kafala-system-191114115435950.html.

[15] At times violent threats and acts were made against protesters from the Shiite Muslim community. As mentioned, this community relies on the group for protection, jobs, social services. Moreover, this community are often side-lined and neglected by state institutions and at times society at large. Therefore, a narrative from this community has emerged in which internal criticism may be permitted but become defensive when their leadership is criticized externally. These videos seriously demotivated some from the community from participating in protests. Yee, Vivian, and Hwaida Saad. “For Lebanon’s Shiites, a Dilemma: Stay Loyal to Hezbollah or Keep Protesting?” The New York Times, The New York Times, 4 Feb. 2020, www.nytimes.com/2020/02/04/world/middleeast/lebanon-protests-shiites-hezbollah.html.

Honourable Donald J. Johnston

The title of these comments is inspired by my personal experience in important areas of public policy both as a politician beginning in the 1970s and more recently as Secretary General of the OECD from 1996 until 2006. That was a very important decade as it ushered in the period which some day we thought would be known as the beginning of globalization on a grand scale.

When I took up my responsibilities in Paris at the end of May 1996 it was a time brimming with optimism about the great future ahead for our children and generations to follow! We were about to say goodbye to one of the most brutal and bloody centuries in human history. Physical human suffering was compounded by poverty and misery of hundreds of millions, especially in the developing world.

Many of us involved at the international level in public policy saw major opportunities to address challenges which had eluded us in the past. Indeed we took a great deal for granted and I must confess that I certainly did. Why? Here are a few examples and the reasons for taking so much for granted.

1. We had just witnessed major geopolitical restructuring in the wake of the fall of the Berlin Wall. The Soviet Union had collapsed and we assumed that the threat of nuclear war had disappeared with it;

2. With the replacement of the GATT the ( WTO) we took for granted the exciting prospect of global free trade and investment, which would bring economic growth and rising prosperity everywhere, but especially to the developing world. We expected “trade” not “aid” to be the route out of third world poverty;

3. The expansion of the proven Marshall Plan formula to regions fractured by division and conflict. We took for granted that such approaches could bring peace to the war torn Balkans and perhaps even to the Middle East and the Arab World;

4. We took for granted that with the publication of the Brundtland Report “ Our Common Future” on Sustainable Development followed by the Rio Earth Summit in 1992, followed by the commitments in the Kyoto Protocol of 1997, that the decades long stalemate of slowing green house gas emissions (GHGs) (and therefore global warming) had been broken and that multilateral international commitments would ensure the protection of the biosphere and its natural capital;

5. We took for granted that improvements to the stunning success of healthy capitalism through universal principles of good corporate governance, supported by an Anti Bribery Convention, would control the greed inherent in the undue exploitation of unfettered capitalism. We took for granted that the wealth and wage disparities would narrow, especially in the United States;

6. We witnessed the remarkable rise of the European Union (EU) uniting former enemies. We took its expansion and global role for granted. Regarding the EU, I often quote a paragraph from the preface of A History of Europe by H. A. L Fisher, a warden at Oxford University in the 1930s. He wrote: “[No] question [would be] more pertinent to the future welfare of the world than how the nations of Europe … may best be combined into some stable organization for the pursuit of their common interests and the avoidance of strife“;

7. We also took for granted the gradual spread of democracy and democratic institutions into the former countries of the Soviet Union and elsewhere in central Europe, South America and Asia;

8. Early misgivings about the ideological bent of Recep Erdogan as the Prime Minister, and then President of Turkey, were dispelled as he initially seemed supportive of good governance, freedom of the fourth estate, free speech and democratic principles. We believed him and took for granted that the remarkable reforms introduced by Mustafa Kemal, known as Ataturk, would ensure the survival of a secular democratic Turkey;

9. We took for granted the United States as a lone global superpower, magnanimous and fair, the first true united nation with people drawn from all corners of the planet to its robust democracy and unlimited opportunities.

As we look back over the past 25 years it is obvious that much too much was taken for granted. Given that so few of the opportunities we assumed would bring the world to a much better place were seized by my generation, what do you perceive as a better way forward? When we open that discussion in a few minutes, I hope I have convinced you to take little for granted. Be wary, if not skeptical, about those who foresee only a prosperous and peaceful future for this wonderful planet.

We need to remind ourselves of the following and address the questions I raise in our general discussion.

1. We failed to engage Russia with the West and as a result are now strengthening NATO in an effort to contain Putin’s aggressive behaviour. History may show this to be the most egregious of all Western public policy failures in the post-Soviet Union period because of its impact on other areas of global concern where Russia should have been a partner. Is it too late to recover from a failure to engage Russia despite the Russian adventures in Crimea and the Ukraine?

2. The EU is increasingly fragile, with concern about the future of the euro common currency and the EU’s capacity to deal with massive immigration from the war-torn areas of the Middle East. Do the weaknesses of the EU reflect a too rapid expansion without strengthening institutions which would move it toward a more federalist structure promoted by the Spinelli group?

3. Tensions have grown between China and its neighbours over territorial disputes, convincing the United States to pivot from its European focus and increase its military presence in Asia. Does this refocussing plus a strengthening alliance between China and Russia herald the reigniting of another Cold War like the one my generation grew up with?

4. Now many more nations ( and possibly terrorist groups) have access to nuclear weapons. Does that greatly increase the possibility of a 21st century nuclear war?

5. The global free trade agenda is in the doldrums with the failure of the Doha Round and the concomitant rise of protectionist rhetoric, especially in the United States , at the highest political levels. Does this mean that global free trade is now beyond reach?

6. Is the prospect of eliminating poverty in the developing world through trade and investment dying?

7. Reductions in GHG emissions, especially CO2, but also methane, continue to elude us after decades of effort, showing how ineffectual the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change process has been and will be. The widely heralded but unenforceable Paris Agreement in the context of a history of failures is even dangerous because much of the public thinks our leaders have come to grips with this challenge (as we all did after the Kyoto Protocol was adopted in 1997). Do they do not realize that even if the agreed upon targets are achieved they are not sufficient to keep global temperatures below the level that the scientific community tells us is necessary to prevent dramatic and irreversible climate change? Is there resistance to developing a Plan B as a last resort to prevent unacceptable global warming? Solar radiation management , a form of geo engineering, seems to be broadly under consideration. Is that good or of concern? As areas of the world may become uninhabitable, will there be mass migration from areas of the developing word to more temperate climates?

8. For those who believe in democracy and perceived it as beginning to take root after the fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of the Soviet Union do subsequent developments undermine the confidence that many democratic governments may be in retreat? In some countries, such as Thailand, there has been a return to a military dictatorship. In others, such as Russia and other countries that were formerly part of the Soviet Union, there is only a pretense of democracy with rigged elections, as in Belarus. There also appears to be backsliding in Turkey, a very important global player and a bridge between Asia and its historic Western allies. The situation in Turkey, which held such promise only a decade ago, is very worrisome. President Erdogan seems increasingly autocratic and intolerant of criticism and dissent. Failure of this democracy could be a sad, even tragic, development. Turkey is a major regional and global power, and through the influence of Atatürk it became an emerging secular democracy with a majority Sunni population straddling Europe and Asia. Atatürk showed the world what individual leadership supported by ethical standards could accomplish in a short period of time.

9. Is the world faced with a growing number of autocratic strongmen who would prefer to destroy the important international infrastructure if it constrains their personal ambitions? It would appear that when one combines the far east, parts of Eastern Europe, Russia, Turkey, China, North Korea, the Philippines, Thailand etc, more than 50% of humanity is or will soon be governed by “strong men“. With few exceptions such as Ataturk, history shows that such people have only one interest “me”.

President Trump gives every indication that he is anxious to join the ranks of these strongmen, initially by withdrawing the United States from the central role it had played through visionary leadership by building and helping to maintain the post war international and institutional architecture. His slogan “America First” should be interpreted for what it really is, namely, “Donald Trump First”.

There is a disquieting commentary in the New York Times of 16 December 2016 entitled “Is Donald Trump a Threat to Democracy” by Professors Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt of Harvard University. Here is an excerpt:

“Donald J. Trump’s election has raised a question that few Americans ever imagined asking: Is our democracy in danger? … Past stability is no guarantee of democracy’s future survival … Our research points to several warning signs.

The clearest warning sign is the ascent of anti-democratic politicians into mainstream politics. Drawing on a close study of democracy’s demise in 1930s Europe, the eminent political scientist Juan J. Linz designed a “litmus test” to identify anti-democratic politicians. His indicators include a failure to reject violence unambiguously, a readiness to curtail rivals’ civil liberties, and the denial of the legitimacy of elected governments. “

Mr. Trump tests positive on all counts. In the campaign, he encouraged violence among supporters and pledged to prosecute Hillary Clinton;

He has threatened legal action against unfriendly media, and continues to suggest that he might not accept the election results saying the election will be rigged. If he loses will he in some way resist leaving office?

Since his 2016 election he has not changed his attitude on any of these issues.

David Frum, a Conservative and traditional Republican and a senior editor at the Atlantic published a book two years ago “Trumpocacy- The Corruption of the American Republic”. It has recently been released in paperback with a new preface by Frum which reviews the appalling record of this individual to whom Americans have entrusted the leadership of the most powerful nation in history.

In a concluding paragraph of the book he writes….” President Trump is cruel, vengeful, ignorant, lazy, avaricious and treacherous…”

Later he adds: “We are living through the most dangerous challenge to the free government of the United States that anyone alive has encountered. What happens next is up to you. Don’t be afraid. This moment of danger can be your finest hour as a citizen and as an American”

Today I cast Frum’s challenge to each of you in a global perspective rather than just American.

Yes, democracy can be fragile everywhere.

We who live in well-established democracies must never be complacent or smug about the success of our societies. The comments of the Harvard professors above echo that concern.

Our democratic societies and their political systems must adapt to a rapidly evolving world. We are increasingly in that global village through forces of globalization amplified by communication and transportation technologies.

In line with the work of Charles Darwin, it has been said that “it is not the strongest of the species that survive, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change.” The same could be said of democratic governments and even empires.

What happens next to global free government is up to your generation of leadership. It is a humungous challenge, especially in countries where the seeds of democracy have never been planted or where they have enjoyed short life spans, Thailand and especially Turkey come to mind.

The future of democracy across the globe could be destroyed if the autocratic motives and moves of Donald Trump succeed, as they well might if I read the current political climate in the United States correctly. Despite shortcomings which need correction such as the unfortunate influence on elections through Super Pacs, the United States has been perceived for years as a remarkable democracy which others attempt to emulate. This may be about to change as it is increasingly viewed as government by the rich, of the rich and for the rich, and Trump does not appear to feel constrained by the institutional checks and balances of the constitution. He could put American democracy on the terrible path to an autocratic state which he seems to admire, especially in the Russia and Turkey of today.

In summary, what looked to be a promising future in all the major areas of concern in the 1990s has evolved into what could best be described as an economic, social, and geopolitical mess. But as bad as that story is, we have succeeded in making the future even more problematic with the arrival of global terrorism.

My generation must recognize the extraordinary failures of the past decades. Your generation must do better.

It seems that efforts to create consensus on major issues amongst many sovereign nations does not work. Is there not a better way forward in global governance? This is the last question I leave you with.

Have 190 counties not offered proof of the impossibility of finalizing an international and binding free trade agreement known as the Doha Round, or as almost 200 countries have done in their efforts to find consensus on concrete solutions to address the challenges of climate change. Neither set of efforts, the first initiated through the WTO process and the second through the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change process, has delivered the results sought and it is unlikely they ever will.

Is starting small and gradually broadening an international consensus a better option? The EU successfully evolved from a small base but has it expanded too rapidly to consolidate and build upon its remarkable and successful beginnings? Even the G20 may be ineffectual because of size and economic and social diversity.

Does the difficulty of building broad consensus on these issues suggests that a structure more resembling the UN Security Council would be more effective? Could the Security Council itself with a limited membership of powerful countries become a global steering group and replace the G-7 process?

Whether we like it or not, each major power has spheres of influence over smaller regional powers through shared history, culture (sometimes language), and trade and investment.

When we compare human and societal evolution to a relay race one generation must pass the baton on to the next. In a small way that is what I am saying to you today. I hope our discussion will touch upon a number of these important and often controversial issues.

We have fallen behind in many respects in the early years of this 21st century, perhaps even forfeiting many of the hard-earned benefits of good capitalism and democracy to an ever increasing number of corrupt strong men and autocratic regimes.

Is that the future?

Remember the words Shakespeare attributed to Brutus:

“There is a tide in the affairs of men, Which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune; Omitted, all the voyage of their life is bound in shallows and in miseries.”

I am persuaded that the latter may be our fate. We did not take the flood of opportunities at hand in the 1990s. Is it too late to recover through hard work, sacrifice and creativity in restructuring global governance for a better world.

What should we do? What can you do?

It will depend to a large extent on your personal values which I hope have not been irreversibly warped by admiration for the material success of greed and visible wealth of the famous 1% who dominate power and politics in the USA and increasingly elsewhere.

I have described the state of the world today as analogous to the fireplace at my country home. It is usually fully loaded with tinder, kindling and dry wood. All it awaits is a match. Unfortunately, in the world today there are many matches waiting to be lit and spread their deadly destruction to regions, if not the planet as a whole.

*

This text is exclusively made as supplementary for a university lecture held on 28 OCT 2020. It is a part of the so-called ‘Geneva Lecture Series – Contemporary World of Geo-economics’, concepted and conducted by prof. Anis H. Bajrektarevic for the Swiss University in Geneva.

Honourable Donald J. Johnston PC OC QC
Senior Minister in the Canadian Government under PM Pierre Trudeau as:
President of the Treasury Board,
Minister of State for Science and Technology,
Minister of State for Economic and Regional Development.
Minister of Justice and Attorney General under PM John Turner.
Secretary General of the OECD Paris (1996 – 2006), nomination of Canadian PM Jean Chrétien.
The first non-European to occupy this prestigious position, he was elected to a second term in 2001.

Despite the economic impacts of the coronavirus crisis, Czechs are borrowing record amounts for housing. During the first nine months of the year, Czech banks provided mortgages for CZK 172, setting a record for that period.

“This year’s increase in the number of mortgages is surprisingly strong. In terms of the total volume of mortgages, it will probably exceed records from 2016 and 2017,” ING’s main economist Jakub Seidler told the daily Hospodářské noviny.

According to the daily, the growth of the Czech mortgage market is fuelled mainly by low interest rates which have been falling for six months in a row. At the moment, they reached 2.07 percent, which is the lowest level since September 2017. Experts predict that interest rates will continue to fall even further in the near future.

According to the main analyst of the Czech Banking Association, Vladimír Staňura, another factor behind the growing volume of mortgage rates is the continuing increase in the value of real estate.

The average mortgage rate in September exceeded CZK 2.8 million for the second month in a row, which represents a nearly 20 percent increase on the previous year.

Read the rest here.

Author: Ruth Fraňková

Door-to-door candy collection may be canceled this year, but you can still get into the Halloween spirit for charity.

The current government measures that prohibit public gatherings in the Czech Republic don’t bode well for ghosts and witches looking to fill up a goodie bag on October 31.

One local trick-or-treat event will take its annual festivities online this year, inviting local families to share photos of kids in costumes while making a donation to a Czech children’s charity.

“Under the lockdown conditions it is not legally possible to conduct trick or treating,” said Dinah Richter-Spritzer, a Prague-based journalist who organized the original Prague Halloween: Trick-or-Treat for Charity event in the Czech capital’s Vinohrady-Zizkov district in 2018.

“By doing this we can still keep the spirit of Halloween and of giving, which was the reason the original event was created,” she said.

The annual Halloween fundraiser was attended by an estimated 400 families last year. It raised 58,000 CZK for SOS Children’s Villages, an organization that supports foster families and disadvantaged children, almost tripling the number of donations collected the year it was launched.

“Each year the money goes toward giving the children wonderful afternoons in nature or doing indoor activities and having great fun,” said Radana Koštialiková of SOS Children’s Villages.

Previous donations have gone toward summer camps, holiday parties, and visits to museums and science centers, activities the children wouldn’t normally be able to enjoy without help.

Koštialiková said help is needed now more than ever as the organization has received fewer donations lately due to COVID.

This year the charity has created a dedicated page for making Halloween donations.

Families can share photos of kids in costume during their at-home celebration on the Facebook page for the now-cancelled event.

Trick or treating is not customary among Czechs though in recent years the practice has gained popularity throughout Prague, especially among international families.

Halloween celebrations around the world are being canceled due to the coronavirus with online alternatives and photo costume competitions springing up in place of traditional door-to-door events.

Written by Elizabeth Zahradnicek-Haas

Source

For the first time in history, the coveted title of Czech ‘Tree of the Year’ has gone to one bearing fruit: a humble apple tree in the courtyard of a village inn near the Polish border. The U Lidmanů inn in the village of Machovská Lhota, in a valley by the Bor Mountain, has been in continuous operation since the late 19th century. The courtyard apple tree is of the tart Kožená Reneta variety, beloved by locals as a source of shade in the summer, and strudel in the autumn.

The newly crowned Czech ‘Tree of the Year’ – which bested a dozen other contenders in a nationwide poll – is not only the first fruit tree to take the title in the contest’s history but also the youngest. The U Lidmanů apple tree has only been standing for less than eight decades. Just like former innkeeper Jaroslav Lidman himself.

“Well, my parents started renting this inn in the year 1945, and I was born here that October. And my parents always told me that was when my father planted this apple tree. The apples are quite nice, but they are rather tart!”

Read the rest here.

Authors:Brian Kenety, Vladislava Wildová

How many sad stories of people being forced to leave their positions in a manner that is far from being correct have you heard recently?

Outplacement program can help both individuals and companies. It saves relationship and reputation.

Linda Štucbartova and Cristina Muntean from our magazine are part of this project and we are looking forward to bringing you new stories soon!

Contact us for more details.

The economic forum for female executives will take place March 15th – 16th 2021.

Download the full program here.

On September 24 and 25, the Human Rights Foundation hosted our first-ever virtual Oslo Freedom Forum, an impactful and high-caliber conference that brought together activists, policymakers, journalists, philanthropists, technologists, and human rights defenders to discuss and debate the best ways to promote freedom and challenge authoritarianism.

Thousands of attendees tuned in from more than 100 countries to listen to incredible stories, participate in panel discussions, and learn more about the fearless work these activists do to stand up to dictatorship and promote freedom around the world.

Our magazine was represented by Linda Štucbartová and Marcela Janíčková, who made some graphics about the event (see below).

Photo by E. Dos Santos-Duisenberg : Labirinto de David, Búzios, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

After a century, the world population faced a new pandemic that fast spread globally, affecting individuals both physically and mentally. Covid-19 started in late 2019 in Asia, spreading so fast that despite the global connectivity and highly sophisticated information technology and communication systems, the interconnected society of the 21st century was incapable to fast react in order to avoid contagion and prevent the worst. Gradually, the pandemic is making a tour around the globe contaminating citizens even in rural communities from all continents. Worldwide, there have been 32 million confirmed cases with over 1 million deaths during the first 9 months of this year .

From this universal pandemic we learned that the interdependent globalized world of 2020 is connected but not synchronized – or as earlier in crisis, prof. Anis H. Bajrektarevic well-noted ‘world on autopilot’ . All scientific, technological and digital knowledge accumulated over centuries remains inept to protect our civilization from an invisible virus that, ironically, can be eliminated with just soap and water. Obviously, the magnitude and the economic, social and cultural impact of this pandemic took humanity by surprise.

Society was already undergoing a deep process of transformation on all fronts. Debates were focused on the fragility of democracy, climate change and sustainability, inequality and inclusion, gender and race, social media and fake news, virtual payments and crypto currencies, artificial intelligence and blockchain. Science, knowledge and technology were advancing at a fast rate in all fields including genetics, neuroscience and biotechnology. Nevertheless, health-care was not a top priority for public investments or national budgets. Yet, with the eruption of the pandemic, priorities had to be immediately revisited. A human-centred and inclusive approach became imperative in every corner of the planet. Incontestably, the 2020s is bringing irreversible disruptions.

Lockdown measures and social isolation deprived individuals of free movements, restricting social gatherings and citizen’s mobility. The home-office dismantled solid organizational structures of daily work conviviality. Closure of schools prevented children from accessing formal in-person education, creating a childcare crisis for working parents. Crowded metropolis became empty urban centres, no shopping, no restaurants and no city life. Cultural festivities and spaces such as theatres, cinemas, and museums had their activities suspended leaving artists, cultural and creative professionals as well as street-vendors out of jobs. Parks and sportive centres became inactive and international tourism ceased.

Conversely, family life became the heart of social order. Parents that were extremely busy with their jobs had to juggle between work and the education of their children. People became less egocentric and started showing more empathy with the needed ones. Solidarity has been manifested in donations and collective assistance by civil society. Companies engaged with social responsibility. Artists, cultural and creative workers were defied to work even harder at home to find new niches in the virtual domain. The confined society had to rediscover its ethical values, principles and priorities.

Free-time and leisure at present

Paradoxically, this shift in human behaviour brought us back to a theory of economics that emerged a century ago (Ruskin, 1900) “There is no wealth but life”. In this new-old context, free-time, leisure, well-being and culture are closely associated. Usually, we use our free-time to carry out activities that are not directly related to work, duties or domestic occupations. May be free-time is an illusion because only in exceptional occasions our time is completely free. Leisure, however, is a subjective concept which varies depending on the society which we belong. It is connected with our participation in cultural life, reflecting the values and characteristics of a nation. Thus, it can be considered a human right according to the UN Declaration of Human Rights (1948), and in particular the International Convention on the Economic, Social and Cultural rights (1967).

Despite some divergent definitions of leisure there is convergence around three distinctions: (i) leisure as time; (ii) leisure as activity; and (iii) leisure as a state of mind. Firstly, it is defined as the constructive use of available time. Leisure as a variety of activities includes the practice of sports or actions related to intellectual and human development like reading, painting, gardening etc. and those can be leisure for ones and work for others. Understanding leisure as a state of mind is complex since it depends on individual perceptions about concepts such as freedom, motivation, competency etc. Certain skills can be considered leisure depending on the degree of satisfaction, emotion or happiness it causes. Yet, the most important is the possibility of free will.

Time available for leisure also varies according to cultural, social and even climate considerations. The notion of time can be different in Africa, Asia, Latin America or Europe. Usually people who live in areas of hot climate enjoy outdoor activities and sports while Nordic people whose habitat is in cold weather prefer indoors socialization and hobbies like playing chess, classic music etc. Social leisure embraces communitarian happenings such as going to the beach, practicing sports in a club etc. Behavioural studies indicate the benefits of social leisure for the well-being of individuals, self-esteem and cultural identity .

Moments of leisure are essential in all phases of our life. During childhood and adolescence most of our time is devoted to study and sports while at adulthood our time is mostly consumed with work and family. Indeed, it is at senior age that retired people generally have extra free-time to enjoy cultural events, leisure and tourism. Globally people are living longer and a new age structure is taking shape: the young senior (65-74 years), the middle senior (75-84 years) and the older senior as from 85 years old. According to the United Nations, in 2018 for the first time in history, persons aged 65 years or over outnumbered children under age five. This partially explains the vast number of people in the group of risk requiring quarantine protection throughout the pandemic period.

Well-being and spirituality in pandemic times

Photo by E. Dos Santos-Duisenberg : Pirâmide Sinética, Búzios, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

During the pandemic, reflections about well-being and spirituality gained space in our minds. It is undeniable that the constraints brought about by lock-down measures and social distancing, offered us more free-time but very limited leisure options. We gained additional time to be closer to loved ones and to do things we like most at home. Enjoying family life, including eating and even cooking together became a shared pleasure and a new leisure style. Individuals had to optimize the quality of their temporarily sedentary lives.

Global pandemics affect our collective mental health. Given the prevailing health and economic insecurity, the focus of our attention has been on well-being, strengthening friendships, expanding social network, practicing solidarity, improving self-esteem as well as reflecting on spirituality and religion. Suddenly the exuberant society of 2020 is afraid of the unknown virus and its long-term harmful consequences on day-to-day life. Well-being and happiness became the essence of achievable goals.

People are emotionally fragile in this moment of anxiety. Individuals are suffering losses that will persist long after the pandemic will be over. Some feel stressed or depressed while others react by searching for relief in exercising, relaxation, meditation, yoga or mindfulness training. Individuals are finding new ways to overcome solitude and boost mental resilience. Current philosophical thinking (Harari, 2018) is reminding us that homo sapiens have bodies but technology is distancing us from our bodies .

Inspirational talks in likeminded groups have been helpful for reconnecting people dealing with an uncertain future. Social engagement and advocacy for health causes are used for promoting social change. Thus, besides upgrading healthcare systems and putting in place special measures for accelerating economic and cultural recovery, targeted governmental support will be needed to improve mental well-being and raise the overall level of satisfaction and happiness of citizens in the post-crisis.

Culture and e-learning nowadays

In a short period of time, many went from an exciting social and cultural lifestyle to a simple life. People had to assume the role of protagonists of their actions. Due to open-air limitations, free-time activities had to be less physically-intensive (no bike, tennis, jogging etc.), and more creative-oriented such as designing, playing music, writing. Much time has also been spent watching TV series, surfing the internet, viewing live music concerts, video-gaming, attending video-conferences as well as socializing in virtual chats. Equally, there are growing concerns about the ethics of consumer technology and internet addiction “time well spent” (Tristan, 2015) .

A recent study carried out in the UK to track digital cultural consumption during the pandemic, indicates that the median time spent daily watching TV are 4 hours, while listening to music, watching films and playing video games each day are 3 hours respectively. Understanding human behaviour, in particular youth habits can help to indicate new cultural trends and consolidate social cohesion in post-pandemic times. Moreover, policy-makers could consider engaging cultural institutions and employing artists and creatives to help facilitate a collective healing process and kick-start recovery.

It is widely recognized that the arts, culture and creative sectors were hit hard by the pandemic. Whist digital cultural and creative products for home consumption were in high demand, others tangible creative goods like arts, crafts, fashion and design products sharply contracted. Many artists and creatives had no option than to experiment on work in digital spaces, since they had to go global from home.

Despite the fact that 4.5 billion people (60% the global population) use internet , the availability of affordable broadband access is a pre-condition to use and benefit from the opportunities provided by digital tools. This applies to both producers and consumers of cultural and creative digital content. Currently, videos account for 80-90% of global digital data circulation, but at the same time Latin America, the Middle East and Africa together represent only around 10% of world data traffic . This evidence points to digital asymmetries that are being aggravated. Creativity only is not enough to transform ideas into marketable creative goods or services if digital tools and infrastructure will not be available.

The pandemic also had a strong impact on education and learning. Re-thinking education was already a topic on the agenda of many countries in order to respond to the realities of the jobs market in the 2020s. Besides the need to adapt methodology and pedagogical practices, many believe it is necessary to bring an interdisciplinary and applied approach to curricula with focus on science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) , preferably also integrating arts (STEAM). In any case, the education system has been forced to quickly adjust to remote learning. Globally over 1.2 billion children are out of the classroom in 186 countries . In Latin America schools are closed and around 154 million children between the ages of 5 and 18 are at home instead of in class . Furthermore, access to school-related inputs is distributed in an unbalanced manner; wealthier students have access to internet and home-schooling while the poorer have not. Young people are losing months of learning and this will have long-lasting effects. The loss for human capital is enormous.

On the positive side, continuous e-learning became a trend and a necessity. Innovation and digital adaption gave rise to a wide-range of on-line courses. Millions of learners are upgrading their knowledge and skills in different domains through distance learning, whether through language and music apps, video conferences or software learning. Some are free others have to be paid for, but what is absolutely transformative is that access to knowledge became more democratic. Independently of age or field of interest, learners from different parts of the world can have access to prestigious universities or practical training. E-learning, where teaching is undertaken remotely and on digital platforms already existed, but demand has sharply increased during pandemic and this might be a point of no return.

Over these critical 9 months, there are growing signs that the 2020s will face a new set of challenges and life will not be back as usual. The future will be very different when compared to the recent past. Hope and fear are likely to co-exist for a certain time. There are new values, new lifestyles, new social behaviour, new consumption standards, and new ways of working and studying. The pandemic has imposed a deep ethical and moral re-assessment on society. This turning point is leading to a deep socio-economic renovation and hopefully to a more inclusive and sustainable society.

*Edna dos Santos-Duisenberg is an economist renowned for her pioneering work in research and international policies on creative economy and its development dimension. She set-up and leaded the UNCTAD Creative Economy Program launching the UN Creative Economy Reports (2008 and 2010). Advisor associated with the United Nations Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR). Member of the International Council of the Creative Industries Policy and Evidence Centre (PEC, London) led by NESTA (UK National Endowment for Science, Technology and Arts). She also serves as Vice President of the International Federation of Internet and Multimedia (FIAM, Montreal). Advises governments and international institutions and collaborates with universities in Europe, Latin America, Asia and the United States.

Czech mountain resorts invested some 750 million crowns into their development this year, the Czech Association of Mountain Resorts said at a press conference on Wednesday. Originally, ski resort operators planned to invest a record one billion crowns, but some of the planned projects had to be postponed due to the coronavirus pandemic.

Ahead of past winter season, ski resorts invested around CZK 600 million into their operation.

A significant part of the investments went into technologies for creating artificial snow, says Libor Knot, director of the Czech Association of Mountain Resorts. The modern equipment is more effective, saving both water and energy.

An increasing number of ski resorts are also investing into the building of artificial water retention capacities.

Another major lump of investments was used for connecting existing ski slopes and for the improvement of online services, including the sale of ski passes.

Read the rest here.

Author: Ruth Fraňková

Summary:

The political balance within the EU at the time of the Covid-19 pandemic has clearly indicated a direction of significant changes. Initially it seemed that solidarity of some seemingly very friendly countries is simply not to be counted on. However, the common problem of all European countries triggered even bigger solidarity, which led to adoption of decisions on joint assistance to member countries. As the pandemic also highlighted the importance of cooperation among countries at the region level in light of their exceedingly obvious interdependence, Brussels clearly signaled that such cooperation should not undermine the common goals and values of the European Union. Although the European assistance for mitigation of consequences of the Covid-19 pandemic implies new debts for member countries, for many countries it will be an important source of recovery from severe economic consequences of the corona crisis. However, some strongly advocate that the assistance should be conditioned with compliance with European values. This means that the Slovenian foreign policy should not leave a shred of doubt about its respect of EU values. The benefit of supporting the stances of specific Visegrad Group (V4) countries, which are contrary to the stances of the founding nations of the EU, is questionable. At the same time, Slovenia should develop closer relations and resolve some important issues with Croatia. This would be sensible as, in a way, Croatia would then be a regional ally of Slovenia and we could also count on each other within the framework of the EU. Resolution of the open issues is an objective interest of both countries, Slovenia and Croatia, and the time has come to resolve them.

Assistance conditioned with respect of European values

Relevant experiences from the Covid-19 pandemic are also related to the internal developments within the EU. When the corona pandemic broke out, it became clear that solidarity among EU member countries is not to be counted on. According to the statements of Slovenian Prime Minister Janez Janša, ever since the beginning of the epidemic Slovenia has not received a single mask, piece of protective equipment, ventilator or similar item from the European Union. We can rely predominantly on ourselves and our friends in the region. Due to strong pressure from specific countries, in which the effects of the pandemic were very grave and which were threatened with very serious economic consequences, talks on provision of assistance were organized. These were heated and exhausting negotiations in which Italy warned that absence of assistance could be fatal for the survival of the EU. However, only a compromise was achieved and no concession was made with respect to the so-called “corona bonds”, which would have been beneficial for the less rich countries. The main impediments to brokering an agreement were the disagreements between Netherland and Italy regarding conditioned assistance from the European Stabilization Mechanism (ESM) and the divergence of the stances of the South and the North on the issue of joint debt. Nevertheless, the EU managed to find a way to a solidarity-based assistance, and the common problem (pandemic) has at least led to some convergence of interests, if not also united member countries. Furthermore, the EU has demonstrated once again its strength despite the seemingly chaotic way in which the solution was devised and decisions made. However, an important element of this assistance is that some member countries strongly advocate the idea that the assistance should be conditioned with compliance with European values. Naturally, the accurate definition of European values is rather debatable, but it is related, inter alia, to the freedom of media, free and fair elections, rule of law, respect of human dignity and rights, etc. Although such conditions have not yet been formalized, bearing in mind the stances of the richest member countries, it is not impossible that they will be made at the practical level. This is an exceptionally important element, which the Slovenian foreign policy should take extremely seriously.

Act as an active and credible member

It is absolutely necessary to advocate, within our capabilities, that the EU remains, as much as possible, an important integration structure in the future within which all member countries will be able to make progress. However, it would be wrong to expect that the EU will operate in the areas in which it has no jurisdiction at all. The EU does not have a single but a common foreign policy. Specifically, a policy on which member countries have reached a mutual agreement. Nevertheless, in areas that are not covered by an agreement, each member state is entitled to act in its own interest. While obligations and responsibilities of member states are clearly defined, the countries can also demonstrate solidarity. In fact, any solidarity within the EU should be welcomed. It is important to advocate solidarity among member countries, but in no way should a country rely on it. Slovenia can act as an active and credible member within the EU, but it should not rely just on the EU. We need to have friends and connections with countries with which we share some common interests. The importance of relations with neighboring countries has become increasingly evident during the period of corona crisis. The coordination with neighboring countries in solution of migration issues has significantly contributed to resolution of concrete problems and difficulties.

During Janez Drnovšek’s government, Slovenia did not want to establish connections with the Visegrad Group (V4). At the time we somehow believed that we need to be oriented to the West. Specifically, to the ones who were to “get on the first train” to the EU or the “narrow group of EU member states.” We haughtily refused the offer to join the V4 group. However, some former members of the team that at the time had influenced the decision to refuse the offer to join the Visegrad Group nowadays promote cooperation with countries from that region. At the last Bled Strategic Forum, which was attended by some of the most important political representatives of these countries, it was noticeable that Slovenia was bending more towards, if not even considering to join, the Visegrad group (V4+1). This would mean a deviation from the commitments that Slovenia has made on a number of occasions. In example, it’s declared aspiration to be part of the “first speed” rather than the “second-speed” group of EU member countries. Slovenia has declared that it wants to be on the “faster train”, that it favors a “deepened” EU and even supports the idea of “United States of Europe.” Naturally, the EU founding nations made notice of our digression. In fact, at the meetings held at various levels they emphasized that it was necessary to advocate a united and strong EU, which, if you read between lines, means that they are not fully satisfied with some activities of the Visegrad Group member countries. This was a crystal clear signal to Slovenia. Namely, the founding nations do not look favorably on extensions of support to the stances promoting policies that influential and economically stronger EU members perceive as a deviation from the European democratic values.

Politicians will change but relations will remain

Building of relations among countries is a long-term process. Politicians will change, but the relations will remain. However, the foundations of cooperation must be in the interest of Slovenia, not in the interest of some groups that represent only a small portion of the nation.

In the period immediately after gaining independence, the Slovenian foreign policy was not aimed at establishing close relations with former Yugoslavia countries. This is entirely understandable, but relations among former Yugoslavia countries and their relations with the EU and other organizations have changed since then. The mutual relations between Slovenia and Croatia are completely illogical. We never went to war with Croatia, and are together with Croatia in the EU and NATO. Many Slovenian citizens have contacts and friends in Croatia, and vice versa. It would make sense if we would be regional allies, so that we could count on each other within the EU as well. Such a development would definitely be beneficial and in the interest of both countries. It is worth mentioning that the countries that are considered “connected” nowadays, such as the Baltic countries, Sweden and Norway, the Benelux countries, the Visegrad Group countries in the past had serious conflicts and in some cases were even strong adversaries. However, the vicinity, various elements of common history, mutual understanding and a list of other elements prevailed over disputes and disagreements and the countries agreed that cultivating good relations and taking a joint stance on an issue is far more beneficial than cultivating exasperation for domestic political purposes.

It is an objective interest of both countries, Slovenia and Croatia, to resolve their open issues. They were addressed many times in the past, but it often seemed that they were being addressed in order not to be resolved. Nevertheless, despite some opinions that at least the most important issues had been resolved, it has turned out that they are still unresolved. The time has come to resolve them.

Slovenians have strong personal connections with the people in the West Balkans. We have important economic relations and still enjoy a relatively high reputation among the people in the West Balkans countries. We also have things to say about the region. Furthermore, cooperation between Slovenia and the West Balkans countries is an important element of regional cooperation.

Of course, relations with other neighbors are also very important. We have to strive to have good neighborly relations, but when it comes to the relevance of “Slavdom”, we have to clearly advocate preservation of the Slovenian minority.

While able and capable politicians further relations that are in the interest of the ruling structure and yield short-term political and financial effects, statesmen further relations that are founded on the interests of the majority of the nation and constitute long-term foundations for relations beneficial in the long-run.

Ljubljana, 14 October 2020

Footnotes:

[1] IFIMES – The Institute for Middle East and Balkan Studies from Ljubljana, Slovenia has a special consultative status within the Economic and Social Council /UN, New York since 2018.

By Ambassador Dr. Jožef Kunič, Member of the IFIMES International Institute, Honorary President of the Slovenian Association for International Relations (SDMO) and former Slovenian ambassador to Iran and France

Owning a car is one of the best and most liberating feelings in the world, but it’s also a huge responsibility. Owning and maintaining a car has to be done regularly to prevent dangerous situations and potential breakdowns when you’re on the road. If you too want to become a more detail-oriented car owner, here are five signs that tell you that you need to start taking better care of your vehicle.

Engine warning light

Every vehicle has a dashboard full of warning lights, some of which are dangerous and some aren’t. This is one of those you don’t want to see blinking, so try to prevent that from happening. Whenever you see that your engine warning light is on, be sure that there’s something wrong with your engine, and go to your mechanic as soon as you can.

These people will know what to do and how to diagnose the problem better than you, so don’t test your DIY skills and try to repair the problem yourself. Your engine warning light might be a sign that there’s something wrong with your car and you may not even be able to notice what the issue is – but your mechanic will know!

Strange sounds

All cars make certain sounds, and that’s just the way it is – whenever you’re driving it, your car is going to produce some sort of sound. This is a sign that your car is simply alive and responding to your commands, and that’s a good thing. But, not all sounds are good sounds, and you need to learn how to distinguish these two categories and understand which sounds indicate a problem with your vehicle.

Whether it’s clunking, flapping, hissing, or something else coming from under your hood – these sounds are telling you that something might be wrong. Again, what you need to do is contact a professional who’ll be able to tell you what the issue is, so do that before new sounds appear!

Ruined visual appeal

When they’re new, all cars look amazing, regardless of the brand, the model, the size, and other factors. This is something owners of these cars know the best, and what you need to do is try to preserve that look for as long as possible. But, that’s not always possible, which is why you might need some help.

Protecting your car against weather conditions such as rain, snow, and wind isn’t easy, but if you have a car cover, it might be doable. These things are quite protective and effective, but you need to know your location and your microclimate before you find the right car cover. If you live in a hot area such as Australia, for instance, you should look for a specific fabric that provides your car with great UV protection. Luckily, these helpful Australian car covers aren’t hard to find, so consider getting one as soon as possible!

Insufficient tire pressure

This is another huge issue that’s ignored by some car owners. Believing that their tires are in perfect condition, they just don’t check the pressure as often as they should, and this leads to blowouts that can cause accidents and put your life in danger.

Checking your tire pressure and regulating it takes just a few moments, so be sure to do that whenever you find yourself at the gas station. Maintaining your tires regularly will help your entire vehicle run smoothly, so be sure not to forget that.

Leaks under the car

Noticing this might not be easy, but if you have a garage or park your car somewhere in the open, you may notice leaks under it. This is usually a result of your air conditioning system working, but how can you be sure of that and what are you supposed to do if that’s not the case?

One of the ways to check what’s going on is inspecting the color of your leak. If it’s clear, it’s the result of your A/C unit, but if it’s brown or black, there could be something wrong with your engine oil, especially if it’s sticky. If the fluid is red, it’s your automatic transmission fluid, and if it’s dark red, it’s your power steering fluid. Finally, if the leaks are yellow, they probably have to do something with the coolant, and if it’s dark brown and slippery – it’s your brake fluid.

Taking care of your car takes a lot of time and energy, but it’s definitely worth your while and your car will appreciate your efforts!

By Peter Minkoff

Peter is a lifestyle and travel writer at Men-Ual magazine, living between Ústí nad Labem and Antwerp. Follow Peter on Twitter for more tips.

The unemployment rate in the Czech Republic has increased by 0.7% since the beginning of this year, which puts it at the overall 2.8%.

These statistics were presented by The Czech Statistical Office (CZSO) and showcase August figures for economic activity, employment, and unemployment among working-age residents in the Czech Republic.

The employment rate among the male population (81.3%) was 14.1% higher than that of women, while the employment rates for the age group of 15-29 are below 50%. The highest employment rate was found in the age group of 30 to 49 (87%), while the age group from 50 to 64 is at 76.7%.

However, Czech unemployment is still much lower than the Europian average, with 7.9% in the 19 eurozone countries and 7.2% in the EU as a whole, according to Eurostat. In August, 15.6 million people were unemployed in the EU, 13.2 million of them being in the eurozone. The Czech Republic is far from leading in terms of the recent rise of unemployment, especially when compared to the largest increases, which were recorded in Lithuania (from 6.6% to 9.6%), Latvia (from 6.2% to 8.8%), Bulgaria (from 3.9% to 6.2%), Sweden (from 6.9% to 9.2%) and Spain (14.3% to 16.2%).

Author: Stanislav Press

Source

The strong conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan, in the autonomous Azerbaijani region of Nagorno-Karabakh/Artsakh, which is under the control of Armenia, was renewed recently.

The latest conflict between the two countries has escalated and there are no indications that it will calm down, at least not in the foreseeable future. The question being imposed is why is this old conflict, which was at a standstill (frozen conflict) after the serious fights between 1988 and 1994 and in April 2016, being renewed now.

Armenia, which controls the disputed region, is satisfied with the status quo, while Azerbaijan, which is rich in energy resources and whose defense expenditures exceed the entire Armenian budget, now threatens to use military force to regain control over the lost region.

The question to be asked is why has this regional conflict, which can have broader dimensions with the siding of Turkey with Azerbaijan and Russia with Armenia is now being activated. This conflict is much more than a conflict between just two countries over a border strip areas, as it is a fight among a group of countries over control of the entire region of Caucasus.

Historical overview of the conflict

The Nagorno-Karabakh region is a striking example of problems caused by the collapse of the Soviet Union (USSR). In the early XIX century, the region had become a part of the Russian Empire after the defeat of the Persians and their formal ceding of the Nagorno-Karabakh region to the Russian Empire on the basis of the Treaty of Gulistan (1813). The region with predominantly Armenian population was given autonomy in the Soviet period (1923) but within the Azerbaijan Soviet Socialist Republic.

With the emergence of signs of collapse of the communist rule of the USSR, people’s representatives in the parliaments in Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh decided in 1988 to unite the region with Armenia. Azerbaijan refused such an idea and abolished the autonomy that the region had enjoyed and subsequently deployed its military forces, which led to a breakout of war that lasted from 1992 to 1994 and caused the loss of this region together with seven neighboring regions, which comprise about one fifth of the territory of Azerbaijan, as well as forcible displacement of around million Azerbaijani citizens from the occupied areas to other parts of Azerbaijan.

Despite the signing of the Bishkek Treaty in 1994, which ended the war, with mediation of the Minsk Group[2], led by France, United States and Russia, the conflicts did not cease. Furthermore, Armenia has still not implemented three United Nations resolutions related to its withdrawal from the areas it had occupied in Azerbaijan.

Turkish role in the conflict

The position of Turkey has been clear ever since the inception of the crisis. Namely, it has been extending support to Azerbaijan. After the recent developments, the Turkish President announced full support of the country to Azerbaijan. Russia, from its side, wants to relax the tensions between the two countries with which it has had special relations ever since the period of the Soviet Union and called on them to return to the negotiating table the sooner the better.

As far as the support of Turkey to Azerbaijan in this conflict is concerned, analysts believe that Turkey is trying to justify itself with the facts of the historical dispute between Turkey and Armenia in relation to the genocide committed against Armenians by the Ottomans in World War I and the close historical and ethnic relations between Turkey and Azerbaijan. The Azerbaijani people (Azeri) belong to the Turkish group of people of Islamic religion, despite the differences in the Medhhab doctrines (religious school of thought). Specifically, Turkey has a Sunni and Azerbaijan a Shia majority.

Official Ankara wants to have a stronghold in the Caucasus region in order to get a better outcome in the talks with Russia. Specifically, it wants to get concession in the civil war in Syria and Libya, as well as the crisis with Greece over exploitation of natural gas in Eastern Mediterranean, in which Ankara and Moscow are on opposite sides.

With the relative relaxation of the situation in Syria and Libya achieved after the US and German had put pressure on Libyan parties, it is to be expected that the Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan (AKP) will, once again, this time in the Caucasus region, be faced with his “friend and adversary” – Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Iranian position

Thecurrent conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenia proves that war, which had been waged over the past years, is not just sectarian, even if the current conflict has ethnic dimensions.

Iran sided with the Christian Armenia, despite the existence of cultural, ethnic and religious connections between Teheran and Baku, where more than a third of Iranians are Azerbaijanis in the Western Azerbaijan, province of Iran, and majority of Azerbaijanis are Shia, like Persians in Iran.

Iran and Azerbaijan share a border that is more than 760 kilometers long and a part of the Caspian Sea, which is rich in oil and natural gas.

Teheran hopes to weaken Azerbaijan, so that the Azerbaijani minority in Iran would not request more rights or show aspirations for unification with their homeland. Iran has strong economic relations with Armenia, based primarily on import of oil, natural gas and electric energy from Iran.

At the same time, Iran is also concerned by the Azerbaijan-Israel relations in the defense area, particularly as Israel, a mortal enemy of Iran, is present at its northern border.

Russian role in the conflict

Armenia is currently Russia’s only Orthodox-Christian strategic ally in the Caucasus and one of the few countries in which Russia has presence. In the opinion of Armenian politicians and defense experts, the Russian military presence in Armenia is an important component of Armenian national security.

In Armenia, in the vicinity of the city of Gyumri, there is a Russian military base no. 102, which is one of the most important facilities of Russian military and geopolitical presence in the Caucasus. It is also one of the key components of the Russia-Armenia relations. Furthermore, the presence of the Russian military in the base in Armenia has been extended until 2044. Russian border guards, together with their Armenian counterparts guard the Armenian border with Turkey and Iran.

As Russia and Armenia are allies, that is two strategic partners connected through numerous agreements in the defense area, it would be expected that Russia should take into account the geopolitical and strategic interests of its ally of Armenia. However, just the opposite is happening in practice. Specifically, Armenian main adversary in the region, Azerbaijan, is buying 40% of weapons from Russia, which is Armenia’s most important strategic partner. It is interesting that the weapons that Azerbaijan is buying from Russia are predominantly offensive and not defensive weapons.

The resignation of the Armenian Prime Minister Serzh Sargsyan from his position under the pressure of mass protests in 2018 in Erevan has led to the question whether Armenia will leave the sphere of Russian influence on the former Soviet area, that is repeat the scenarios seen in Georgia and Ukraine, or will Moscow become the main actor in this republic at the south of the Caucasus region.

Although the new Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan is undoubtedly of pro-Western orientation, Armenia has no alternative to the alliance with Russia because of the vicinity of its historical adversaries of Turkey and Azerbaijan.

Armenia is an important ally of Russia on the territory of the former Soviet Union. Armenian economy largely depends on Russian investments and remittances from Armenians residing in Russia. Namely, around 2.5 million Armenians live in Russia.

Analysts believe that the disputed Nagorno-Karabakh region is a kind of a “time bomb”,which will not explode as long as Armenia is a military ally of Russia.

Stances of US and EU

As for the US position in the conflict, the US is neutral and trying to resolve the conflict between the two countries. After the recent developments, Washington condemned the escalation of violence between Azerbaijan and Armenia, and called on both sides to end the hostilities.

The stance of the European Union and the US is the same. Specifically, that the conflict should be ended in order to prevent interruptions in the supply of oil and natural gas from the Caspian Sea.

Israel’s siding

Inthis conflict Israel has sided with Azerbaijan. Israel has been one of the strongest allies of Baku since 2011 and sells significant amounts of weapons and military equipment to Azerbaijan.

Analysts believe that Azerbaijan is the new point of conflict and rivalry between Iran and Israel, because Israel already has marked presence in the vicinity of Iranian border.

In the opinion of the analysts of the IFIMES international institute, when it comes to military balance of forces, Azerbaijan has leverage over Armenia, because it has developed its military forces and procured modern weapons from Russia, Turkey and Israel- capitalizing on high oil prices over the past two decades. Analysts downplay the possibility of launching of a major military campaign taking into account that Armenia is a member of the Collective Security Treaty Organizations (ODKB/CSTO)[3], which was established by Russia in 2002.

Leading global powers should intensify the efforts through the UN Security Council and the Minsk Group to stop further development of the conflict and its escalation into a bigger and broader war. One of the main reasons for the current escalation of the conflict is the lack of active international mediation between the two sides.

Russia and Turkey should repeat their mediatory missions using the model of their cooperation in Syria, where Turkey has sided with the opposition, while Russia offers military and political support to the government in Damascus.

Ljubljana/Baku/Washington, 2 October 2020

Footnotes:

[1] IFIMES – The Institute for Middle East and Balkan Studies from Ljubljana, Slovenia has a special consultative status within the Economic and Social Council /UN, New York since 2018.

[2] OSCE Minsk Group is a multilateral group within the framework of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. It was established in 1992 with the aim to instigate peaceful and mutually agreed solution to the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan over the Nagorno-Karabakh/Artsakh region. The Minsk Group is headed by a collective presidency consisting of France, Russia and the United States. Other participants in the work of the group include: Belarus, Germany, Italy, Portugal, Netherlands, Sweden, Finland, Turkey, as well as the directly interested states of Armenia and Azerbaijan.

[3] Collective Security Treaty Organization (ODKB/CSTO) was established in 2002, as a military alliance of the post-Soviet states: Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Armenia, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan.

The conference named “75 years of Europe’s Collective Security and Human Rights System”, which took place on the 1st of July at the Diplomatic Academy of Vienna, brought together experts related to the reality of the Old Continent and its Union over the course of the past 75 years of its post-WWII anti-fascist existence. It was jointly organized by four different entities (the International Institute for Middle East and Balkan Studies IFIMES, Media Platform Modern Diplomacy, International Scientific Journal European Perspectives, and Action Platform Culture for Peace) with the support of the Diplomatic Academy of Vienna, numerous academia supporting and media partners).

The conference gathered over twenty high ranking speakers from Canada to Australia, and audience physically in the venue while many others attended online – from Chile to Far East. The day was filled by three panels focusing on the legacy of WWII, Nuremberg Trials, the European Human Rights Charter and their relevance in the 21st century; on the importance of culture for peace and culture of peace – culture, science, arts, sports – as a way to reinforce a collective identity in Europe; on the importance of accelerating on universalism and pan-European Multilateralism while integrating further the Euro-MED within Europe, or as the Romano Prodi’s EU Commission coined it back in 2000s – “from Morocco to Russia – everything but the institutions”.

The event itself was probably the largest physical gathering past the early spring lock down to this very day in this part of Europe. No wonder that it marked a launch of the political rethink and recalibration named – Vienna Process.

The panel under the name “Future to Europe: Is there any alternative to universal and pan-European Multilateralism? Revisiting and recalibrating the Euro-MED and cross-continental affairs”, was focused on discussing the determinants of Europe’s relations with its strategic Euro-MED and Eurasian neighbourhood, the possible pan-European political architecture as well as on the forthcoming post-crisis recovery.

On the latter topic, the panellist Dr. Mario Holzner, who is the Executive Director of the WIIW Austria, outlined the policy proposal on the post-pandemic European recovery programme, elaborated by his Viennese Institute in collaboration with the Paris-based research institute OFCE and the German IMK Macroeconomic Policy Institute. The Recovery Fund recently proposed by the European Commission represents a benchmark in the era of stalled European integration, and during the unstable and precarious post-pandemic times it holds a crucial role for overcoming the immense political and economic crisis of 2020. Following on much public debate about the recovery financing, which however has heretofore lacked the proposals for concreteprojects that the EU should allocate the funds into, it is now urgently needed to come up with these.

WIIW Director Dr. Mario Holzner addressing the Conference.

WIIW, OFCE and IMK, three research tanks dealing with economic topics, suggested two main pillars – an EU one, and a national one- for the spending of the Commission’s recovery programme that reaches the amount of €2tn and is to allotted over a 10-year horizon. The spending of the EU pillar is to be channelled into the area of healthcare, eventually giving rise to a pan-European health project under the name Health4EU. Not least, another efficient allocation of the funds located in the programme’s EU pillar is to projects helping to mitigate the risks resulting from climate change, as well as to develop an EU-wide rail infrastructure that would substantively contribute to achieving the Commission’s goals of carbon-neutrality at the continent.

Among other, the proposal introduces two ambitious transport projects- a European high-speed rail infrastructure called Ultra-Rapid-Train, which would cut the travel time between Europe’s capitals, as well as disparate regions of the Union. Another suggested initiative is an integrated European Silk Road which would combine transport modes according to the equally-named Chinese undertaking.

Dr. Holzner’s experts team put forward the idea to “electrify” the European Commission’s Green Deal. Such electrification is feasible through the realisation of an integrated electricity grid for 100%-renewable energy transmission (e-highway), the support for complementary battery and green-hydrogen projects, as well as a programme of co-financing member states’ decarbonisation and Just Transition policies. Together, the suggested policy proposals provide the basis for creating a truly sustainable European energy infrastructure.

From the national pillar, it should be the member states themselves who benefit from the funding allocation in the overall amount of €500bn. According to the experts from WIIW, these resources should be focused on the hardest-hit countries and regions, whereas it is imperative that they are front-loaded (over the timespan of three years).

The overall architecture of the programme’s spending, involving the largest part of the budget, needs to be focused on long-term projects and investment opportunities that would serve as a value added for the European integration, while also allowing to build resilience against the major challenges that the EU currently faces. The proposed sectors for the initiatives which could be launched from the EU’s funding programme are public health, transport infrastructure, as well as energy/decarbonisation scheme. Accordingly, it is needed that the funding programme is primarily focused on the structural and increasingly alarming threat of climate change.

As stated in the closing remarks, to make this memorable event a long-lasting process, the organisers as well as the participants of this unique conference initiated an action plan named “Vienna Process: Common Future – One Europe.” In the framework of this enterprise, the contributing policy-makers and academics will continue to engage in meaningful activities to reflect on the trends and developments forming the European reality while simultaneously affecting the lives of millions. The European system, formed over centuries and having spanned to a political and economic Union comprising 27 states, is currently being reconfigured as a result of numerous external factors such as Brexit, the pandemic, as well as the dynamics in neighbouring regions. All of these are engendering the conditions for a novel modus operandi on the continent, whereby it is in the best intention of those partaking at this conference to contribute to a more just, secure, and peaceful European future.

About the author:

Tereza Neuwirthová, of Leiden University, International Studies program is the EU and IOs affairs specialist that monitors the EU Commission affairs from Brussels.

Footnotes:

[1] IFIMES – International Institute for Middle East and Balkan Studies, based in Ljubljana, Slovenia, has Special Consultative status at ECOSOC/UN, New York, since 2018.

Medicine and technology have united on numerous fronts, but uniquely so in the battle against cancer. For many patients, this is a battle against time, and the sooner we are able to deliver smarter, more personalized treatment options, the greater their chances are of survival, and a greater quality of life. Currently, there are numerous studies promising enough to deliver truly outstanding cancer treatment opportunities in the near future, some of them already in different stages of testing.

The following research projects and scientific fields seem to be the most favorable when trying to build a cancer-free future. From how we lead our lives to boost our own longevity with prevention, all the way to gene therapy, cancer could potentially be defeated on several key fronts. Here, we’ll cover a few of the most opportune solutions to the cancer issue that the future might hold.

Prevention in the spotlight

While discovering different cures for cancer and building potent treatments is continuously stealing the spotlight, prevention is another aspect of defeating cancer in the future that will help on numerous levels. By promoting healthy habits such as proper nutrition and exercise paired with taxes on cigarettes and alcohol, further enforced by vaccination against common cancer-causing pathogens such as HPV, anywhere between 20 to 40% of all cancer cases would be prevented.

Lifestyle modifications are a matter of collective awareness and culture, and if prevention were increased even marginally, the budget that would otherwise be used to treat preventable diseases could be repurposed to research and treat other forms of non-preventable cancer.

Harnessing the power of our immune system

On one hand, we know that our immune system is quite a powerful mechanism against pathogens such as viruses and bacteria. Every time our body is attacked by a pathogen, an immune response is triggered to eliminate the intruder. When your own cells become the intruders and start mutating without control, your immune system doesn’t always respond, which is when cancer occurs. Leveraging specific, rare immune cells to produce a powerful immune response against cancer is the focus of numerous research projects today.

For example, Dr. Chow and her team have discovered that certain immune cells such as plasmacytoid dendritic cells have the potential to respond to more than just viral infections, but to potentially help defeat cancer. This particular research deals with how the immune system and these pDCs can be programmed to target cancerous cells and if a vaccine can be created to build up an immune response against cancer.

Personalized vaccines

Although cancer is a convenient term to use, it actually denotes not one, but many different cellular mutations, all unique to each patient. Knowing that, many scientific research projects targeting cancer are actually focusing on that particular feature of the disease. By targeting the mutation pattern itself, scientists are looking into ways to personalize a treatment that will be unique to each individual patient.

With the help of the right mapping tools and methodologies, we have the capacity to map the mutations of each cancer and recognize the unique mutation patterns that can be used to create a potent, personalized vaccine.

Using the microbiome

Now that we know that the microbiome is an essential segment of our immune system, it stands to reason that it can have a major impact on treating cancer. Immunotherapy based on recognizing and isolating specific immune cells to eliminate cancerous cells can often be complemented by what our microbiome does for our health.

Research has shown that specific microbial strains can help increase the impact of our immune response to defeat cancer. By increasing the levels of those microbial strains in the gut, our immune system can potentially be more effective when fighting cancer cells. The process is still not entirely clear, and there’s much we have yet to learn about this curious interaction between our microbiome, cancer, and our cells’ stress response, but it seems we are on the verge of another breakthrough in treating cancer with our own defense systems.

Advanced detection technologies

Cancer screenings are often disguised as the most mundane medical checkups we all go through at least once a year. Then there are those standard self-examinations that are encouraged everywhere to spot early signs of malignant changes and recognize the right moment to head to a doctor. However, some of these methods are not nearly as precise as we need them to be. In truth, we need more refined, fine-tuned screening methods that help us detect and diagnose cancer in its earliest possible stages.

Take colonoscopy as an example of a common test that aims to detect early signs of colorectal cancers. Alas, this exam comes with a 20% “miss rate”, allowing for too many cancers to go undiagnosed for too long. In response to such diagnostic issues, more scientists are focusing on designing cutting-edge screening methods such as molecular imaging that will help reduce the miss rate significantly, or make cancer much easier to spot early on, even before it forms.

Every step of the way, from prevention, detection and diagnosis, all the way to actual treatment, cancer research is one of this century’s greatest intellectual and innovation battlefields. As more experts work together to understand cancer as a group of diseases and to fully comprehend the role of our own immunity, taming cancer is slowly becoming a question of collective awareness and collaboration, rather than finding that one, single cure.

Hopefully, the ongoing studies and research programs will give us the direction we need to adapt our lifestyles and to take advantage of the most advanced scientific breakthroughs available to treat and prevent cancer.

By Peter Minkoff

Peter is a lifestyle and travel writer at Men-Ual magazine, living between Ústí nad Labem and Antwerp. Follow Peter on Twitter for more tips.

From left: Kittikhun Sodprasert, Payom Valaiphatchra, and Sampow Triudom

I am often asked in interviews and by people in general how I came up with the lyrics of The Asean Way. It ́s actually quite challenging to find a way to unite 10 different nations of very diverse characteristics and qualities with one song. It was even more difficult when such song had to be no more than 60 seconds long.

There were many questions then. How many words can fit into the song? How to capture the ASEAN spirit into these few lines in the lyrics? How to communicate with all the 600 million plus people in region through this English song while English is not our mother tongue? How to say who we are, what we aspire, etc, etc. How to express in one voice that we are one community with one vision and one common identity?

Fortunately, I was formerly an exchange student under the auspices of American Field Service Scholarship — now known as AFS Intercultural Programs — and the intercultural learning gained really helps bridge all kinds of cultural gap. Besides, I was for 21 years a journalist who had been interested in our neighbouring countries. I think that helps me understand all our ASEAN friends quite well.

In writing the lyrics, I was first telling myself that each word had to be meaningful yet easily understood since the majority of our population does not speak English. In the creative process, I was asking myself what I would love to see after our integration into one common community – the ideal way of the ASEAN. Then a few key words came to my mind… words like pride, bond, care, share, peace, prosperity, together – which are all very important elements in building a sustainable society. And to lace them up together in a song, I was thinking of the symbol of our common identity which is none other than the ASEAN flag. And there you go… The ASEAN Way.

My favorite lines in the song are: “We dare to dream. We care to share…together for ASEAN.” I think this is the very heart of it. If we wish to prosper as one, we should not be shy to dream –even the impossible dream — and then work together for the good of our region, without forgetting to care for, and share with, our brothers and sisters in the ASEAN. to dream. We care to share…together for ASEAN.” I think this is the very heart of it. If we wish to prosper as one, we should not be shy to dream –even the impossible dream — and then work together for the good of our region, without forgetting to care for, and share with, our brothers and sisters in the ASEAN.

Payom Valaiphatchra
Executive Vice President
Syllable Company Limited
Sanskrit Company Limited (www.sanskritbook.com)

Possible Implications of China’s Involvement in Nuclear Arms Talks

Alexander G. Savelyev

In December 2019, the United States officially invited China to enter into a strategic security dialogue. The White House said it hoped Beijing’s consent to this proposal might become the first step towards an international agreement encompassing all nuclear weapons of the United States, Russia, and China. As expected, this proposal was rejected. China said its nuclear arsenal was much smaller than those of the United States and Russia, and it would be able to participate in such talks only when their nuclear potentials were brought to parity with its own.

In March 2020, U.S. President Donald Trump once again declared his intention to ask Russia and China to hold such talks with the aim of avoiding a costly arms race (Reuters.com, 2020). The Chinese Foreign Ministry’s response followed virtually in no time. Its spokesperson Zhao Lijian said that China had no intention of taking part in the so-called China-U.S.-Russia trilateral arms control negotiations, and that its position on this issue was very clear (ECNC.cn., 2020). He called upon the United States to extend the New START and to go ahead with the policy of U.S-Russian nuclear arms reduction, thus creating prerequisites for other countries to join the nuclear disarmament process. There is nothing new about China’s stance. A year earlier Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Geng Shuang, while speaking at a news conference in May 2019, made a similar statement. China refused to participate in a trilateral arms control agreement (Fmprc.gov.2019).

It is noteworthy that while advising the United States and Russia to downgrade their nuclear potentials to its level, China does not say what exactly this level is. One of the rare official statements (if not the sole one) on that score was the Chinese Foreign Ministry’s statement, published on April 27, 2004, that China’s nuclear arsenal was the smallest of all (Fact Sheet China, 2004). Even in that case the Chinese Foreign Ministry did not specify if it was referring to the quintet of the UN Security Council’s permanent members. If so, China’s nuclear arsenal, according to official statistics, consisted of no more than 190 warheads (Britain’s level that year). Such (understated according to most analysts) estimates, have also been mentioned by a number of experts. For example, Harvard researcher Hui Zhang says China in 2011 had 166 nuclear warheads. There are other, higher estimates. For instance, Professor Phillip Karber of Georgetown University believes that China has 3,000 warheads at its disposal (Karber, 2011), while many other researchers call this in question.

The estimate offered by H. Kristensen and M. Korda of the Federation of American Scientists, who issue annual world surveys of nuclear arms potentials, is shared by most researchers and draws no objections from political circles in various countries, including the United States. According to their calculations as for April 2020, the United States had 3,800 deployed and non-deployed nuclear warheads, and Russia, 4,312 warheads. As for China, the same survey says it has 320 non-deployed nuclear warheads (Kristensen and Korda, 2020).

While underscoring the importance of nuclear arms cuts by the United States and Russia to China’s level, Beijing does not specify if this idea applies only to strategic or all nuclear weapons. In the former case, if China’s approach is to be accepted, Russia and the United States would have to slash their nuclear arsenals by 65%-75% (from 1,550 deployed nuclear warheads in compliance with the rules of the still effective New START). But if the total number of nuclear warheads on either side is to be counted, each country’s nuclear potential would shrink by no less than 90%. Only after this will China be prepared to consider in earnest its participation in nuclear arms control talks.

The United States and Russia can hardly find this suitable. At the same time, these countries have not yet officially formulated their specific approaches to and basic provisions of hypothetical trilateral talks and a future agreement on this issue. For the time being, these issues are in the focus of experts’ attention in a number of countries, and they have over the past few years offered a variety of possible formats and parameters of a future “multilateral” treaty. In most cases, experts delve into certain aspects of a future agreement that might be attractive to China. Very few think of what China might lose the moment it enters into nuclear arms control talks or what military-political consequences might follow if China eventually changed its mind regarding participation in such negotiations.

In my opinion, China’s demand for achieving the “comparability” of nuclear potentials as a precondition for beginning a trilateral dialogue stems precisely from its evaluation of the consequences of its participation in the negotiations. This stance is neither far-fetched nor propagandistic, contrary to what some experts and politicians claim, but rests upon major political, military and strategic cornerstones. Disregard for China’s arguments actually reduces to nothing all efforts, above all those taken by Washington, to engage Beijing in nuclear arms talks.

As far as the United States is concerned, the motives behind its attempts to persuade China to join nuclear arms talks are not quite clear. There may be several possible considerations that the United States is guided by in its policy on the issue. One is that Washington may be looking for a way to obtain necessary information about the current state of China’s nuclear potential and plans for its development in the future in order to be able to adjust its own modernization programs accordingly. Another explanation is that the United States may be reluctant to go ahead with the nuclear disarmament policy and hopes to use China’s unequivocal refusal to participate in negotiations as a chance to blame it for the disruption of this process and for dismantling the nuclear arms control system as such. I believe both explanations may be true, but their analysis lies beyond the scope of this article.

OPTIONS OF ENGAGING CHINA IN NUCLEAR ARMS CONTROL TALKS

“Americans performed three very different policies on the People’s Republic: From a total negation (and the Mao-time mutual annihilation assurances), to Nixon’s sudden cohabitation. Finally, a Copernican-turn: the US spotted no real ideological differences between them and the post-Deng China. This signalled a ‘new opening’: West imagined China’s coastal areas as its own industrial suburbia. Soon after, both countries easily agreed on interdependence (in this marriage of convenience): Americans pleased their corporate (machine and tech) sector and unrestrained its greed, while Chinese in return offered a cheap labour, no environmental considerations and submissiveness in imitation.

However, for both countries this was far more than economy, it was a policy – Washington read it as interdependence for transformative containment and Beijing sow it as interdependence for a (global) penetration. In the meantime, Chinese acquired more sophisticated technology, and the American Big tech sophisticated itself in digital authoritarianism – ‘technological monoculture’ met the political one.

But now with a tidal wave of Covid-19, the honeymoon is over” – recently wrote professor Anis H. Bajrektarevic on a strategic decoupling between the biggest manufacturer of American goods, China and its consumer, the US.

Indeed, Washington has not formulated in detail its official stance on engaging China in negotiations yet. Disarmament experts consider a number of options that may be proposed in principle. These options may be grouped into three main categories. The first one is putting pressure on China with the aim of making it change its mind regarding arms control. The second one is the search for proposals China may find lucrative enough, which the Chinese leadership might agree to study in earnest. And the third one is a combination of these two approaches.

As far as pressure on China is concerned, the United States is already exerting it along several lines. For one, China is criticized for the condition and development prospects of its nuclear arsenal. Specifically, it is blamed on being the only nuclear power in the Permanent Big Five that has not reduced its nuclear potential. Moreover, as follows from a statement made in May 2019 by Robert Ashley, Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, “over the next decade, China is likely to at least double the size of its nuclear stockpile in the course of implementing the most rapid expansion and diversification of its nuclear arsenal in China’s history” (Adamczyk, 2019). Both officials and many experts have been quoting this postulate as an established fact requiring no proof.

China is also accused of the lack of transparency, that is, refusal to disclose the size and structure of its nuclear forces, programs for their upgrade, and other nuclear policy aspects. The U.S. leadership argues that this state of affairs by no means promotes strategic stability and international security. Some experts believe that China’s involvement in negotiations would help avoid some adverse effects, for example, another nuclear arms race under a Cold War scenario (Zhao, 2020). Rose Gottemoeller, U.S. Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security in the Barack Obama administration, believes it may be possible to “make a case for the Chinese to come to the table early on intermediate-range constraints of ground-launched missiles, because they are staring at the possibility of a deployment of very capable U.S. missiles of this kind” (Mehta, 2020).

Apparently, the United States had counted on Russia’s support in such matters, especially as the Russian leadership said more than once that the New START, signed in 2010, was to become the last bilateral nuclear arms reduction treaty and time was ripe for other nuclear states to join the nuclear disarmament process. However, in late 2019 Russia made a U-turn in its stance on China’s participation in negotiations. Speaking at a conference entitled “Foreign Policy Priorities of the Russian Federation in Arms Control and Nonproliferation in the Context of Changes in the Global Security Architecture,” held on November 8, 2019 in Moscow, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said that Russia respected China’s position concerning its refusal to participate in the talks. Moreover, he stated that declaring China’s consent to participate in the negotiating process as a precondition looked “openly provocative.” Thus Russia made it clear that it had no intention of putting pressure on China regarding the issue, but at the same time it would have nothing against the Chinese leadership eventually making a decision to join the United States and Russia in nuclear disarmament talks. Russia is unlikely to alter its position even under pressure from the United States, which has long harbored plans for using the prolongation of the New START as a factor for getting China involved in the talks in some way, or even securing its consent to become a signatory to the treaty. Specifically, the U.S. president’s National Security Advisor Robert O’Brian made an unequivocal statement on that score (Riechmann, 2020). Also, in May 2020, the United States came up with an ultimatum that it would not extend the New START until China agreed to participate in it. Moreover, the newly appointed special U.S. presidential representative for arms control, Marshall Billingslea, actually demanded that Russia “bring the Chinese to the negotiating table.”

The United States may exert (or is already exerting) pressure on China “indirectly,” for example by using such levers as the U.S.-Chinese trade war and China’s alleged “responsibility” for the spread of the coronavirus (which the United States regards as proven). Such pressures may be largely exerted covertly.

Some military and political experts believe that it is worth exploring compromise options of China’s participation in nuclear arms control. Such options may accommodate the interests of all partakers and match the specific structure and quantitative parameters of weapons subject to control. Establishing transparency in the given sphere would be one of the “simple” ways of involving China in the strategic dialogue. In other words, such transparency would imply mutual disclosure of information about the number of missiles and deployed warheads, their basic parameters, including range, and also specific locations and deployment sites (Tosaki, 2019). It must be noted that this seemingly “least painful” and easy-to-accomplish solution for making China join the international arms control dialogue is in fact least acceptable to it.

The long list of other proposals includes various options of a “mixed” approach to the control of missile systems. For instance, reaching an agreement on a common ceiling for intermediate-range ground-based and air-launched missiles or a similar restriction on any strategic missiles regardless of the type of deployment (ground, sea, or air launched), as well as the intermediate-range missiles of three nuclear powers―China, the United States, and Russia. The proponents of this approach believe that this may provide an approximately equitable basis for talks among the aforesaid states (Zhao, 2020).

All of the aforementioned recommendations―and a number of other ideas―for plugging China into bilateral or multilateral nuclear arms control talks are based on the past experience of negotiations on the issue. In the meantime, the specifics of China’s nuclear policy are left unnoticed or intentionally ignored. It is generally believed that inviting China to participate in negotiations is tantamount to official recognition of its status as a great power responsible, like the United States and Russia, not only for its own security but also for global security. This recognition is often considered a reason enough to expect China to consent to participate in such negotiations and the main problem is seen in the formulation of concrete proposals for discussion. In the meantime, such an approach looks erroneous.

THE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF CHINA’S NUCLEAR POLICY

China’s policy concerning nuclear arms and their role in maintaining national security has remained unchanged for more than 55 years, starting from its accession to the “nuclear club” in 1964. Central to that policy is China’s pledge not to be the first to use nuclear weapons or threaten to use them against non-nuclear countries and countries in nuclear free zones. It is believed that Mao Zedong made that decision personally in 1964 (Fravel, 2019).

In accordance with this pledge, China, as it reiterates, maintains its nuclear deterrence weapons at a required minimum by declaring its readiness for retaliation against an aggressor in the event of a hypothetical nuclear attack. China vows it does not participate in a nuclear arms race against any country. These provisions have remained unchanged for many years and can be found in many Chinese fundamental military and strategic planning documents, available from open sources (The State Council, 2019), and are repeatedly quoted by the Chinese mass media (Xinhuaneet.com., 2019).

In contrast to the classical nuclear deterrence formula China does not demonstrate its retaliatory strike capabilities; on the contrary, it conceals them for various reasons. Enhancing the survivability of retaliatory strike systems is one. Such “existential” means of deterrence enables the country possessing a relatively small nuclear potential to keep a potential aggressor in a state of strategic uncertainty as it cannot be certain that its first strike would “disarm” the defending opponent by eliminating all of its nuclear weapons with a surprise counterforce strike.

To confirm its adherence to the no-fist use principle, China declares that it limits its nuclear potential to the “minimum” defense requirements, while all upgrade programs are geared mostly to ensuring the survivability and reliability of retaliatory strike systems. China’s nuclear forces have become more survivable due to the creation and deployment of mobile ICBMs, and measures to shelter a considerable part of its nuclear potential, including mobile ICBMs and shorter-range missiles in a network of underground tunnels―the Underground Great Wall of China. Also, other means of hiding nuclear weapons are used, such as mock ICBM silos and shelters for nuclear submarines inside coastal rocks.

As the information about the condition, development prospects and size of China’s nuclear potential remains scarce, its nuclear policy issues are in the focus of attention of many specialists and think tanks in the United States and other countries. Most of them (but far from all) believe that China’s declared policy of no-first-use of nuclear weapons and estimates of its nuclear potential (around 300 warheads) agree with reality (Pifer, 2019). But other researchers maintain that under certain circumstances China may revise its attitude to the no-first-use principle and abandon the minimum deterrence concept in favor of gaining opportunities for conducting limited nuclear war. Such conclusions are made on the basis of data showing the growth of qualitative parameters of China’s nuclear forces―greater accuracy of nuclear warheads, the deployment of MIRVs on ICBMs, forecasts for a considerable increase in the overall number of nuclear weapons at the country’s disposal, etc. (Giacomdetti, 2014; Yoshihara and Bianchi, 2019; Schneider, 2019).

It should be acknowledged that the lack of official information about the condition and development prospects of China’s nuclear arsenal and implementation of programs in the strategic field (creation of a heavy ICBM, research and development of a missile attack warning system, deployment of a missile defense, and others) afford ground for a variety of speculations over China’s compliance with the professed principles regarding nuclear weapons. In the meantime, this by no means contradicts the fundamental principle of China’s nuclear policy―no-first-use of nuclear weapons―which will remain unchanged in the foreseeable future. Even if one assumes that China does participate in the nuclear arms race (which is also a subject of speculations), it is by no means its instigator.

Certain changes are possible, though. China may acquire real capabilities for a limited response to a limited nuclear attack. In other words, the country’s military-political leadership, empowered to make a decision to use nuclear weapons, will acquire extra opportunities and options for retaliation other than a massive nuclear strike against the enemy’s major unprotected targets, such as cities and industrial centers. At the same time there is no reason to say that the improvement of parameters of China’s strategic nuclear forces increases the risk of a first counterforce strike against a would-be aggressor just because the nuclear potentials of China and the two leading nuclear powers are incomparable. In this case size does matter.

EFFECTS OF ARMS CONTROL ON CHINA’S NUCLEAR STRATEGY AND POLICY

Should China agree to participate in negotiations or draft an agreement on control of its nuclear weapons, its nuclear strategy and policy will most likely undergo the most serious changes. And these changes, in the author’s opinion, may be far from positive. They will result not from possible restrictions imposed on China’s nuclear forces or disadvantageous terms of a future treaty forced upon China, but the very fact of concluding such an international treaty.

A close look at Soviet-U.S. and Russian-U.S. nuclear arms control agreements reveals how the parties’ approaches to solving the problems of national security and strengthening strategic stability have been changing. At early stages the two sides managed to come to terms regarding the overall number of ground-based launchers of strategic ballistic missiles, SLBM capable submarines and SLBM launchers. Later, the class of strategic weapons was expanded to incorporate heavy bombers armed with long-range cruise missiles and gravity nuclear bombs. Some types of nuclear weapons, for instance, strategic air-launched ballistic missiles were banned. Next, there followed restrictions on nuclear warheads deployed on delivery vehicles and then their reductions. A total ban was applied to ground-based intermediate- and shorter-range cruise missiles. An attempt was made to outlaw ICBMs with multiple warheads. Each clause of the concluded treaties was scrutinized by the expert community and drew worldwide interest.

In addition, efforts were made to develop a mechanism to verify compliance with the assumed commitments. The first Soviet-U.S. agreements SALT-1 (1972) and SALT-2 (1979) assigned the control function to “national technical means of verification”―intelligence satellites. The contracting parties pledged to refrain from creating impediments to their operation. Also, the signatories undertook “not to use deliberate concealment measures which impede verification by national technical means of compliance.” In the next agreements―the INF Treaty (of 1987) and, particularly, START-1 (1991) ― a comprehensive system of control and verification was developed and adopted. It envisaged exchanges of data (including the geographical coordinates of each ICBM silo) and various notifications and on-site inspections, which made it totally impossible to conceal even the slightest violations of these agreements. This system of verification functions within the framework of the still effective Russian-U.S. New START, concluded in 2010.

It is hard to imagine a hypothetical agreement with China not including compliance verification procedures. And it is very unlikely that the system of verification in such an agreement will be “soft,” as was the case with the one established under the earlier SALT-1 and SALT-2 treaties. On the contrary, as follows from statements by U.S. officials, the United States is determined to pay the closest attention to the verification and control of compliance with all future agreements. U.S. Acting Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Christopher Ford has made an explicit statement on this score.

Even if such an agreement does not impose any obligations on China, requiring reduction of its nuclear potential, Beijing will be expected to provide exhaustive information about its nuclear weapons and deployment sites. Also, China will have to give up measures to conceal its nuclear forces, change the locations of mobile missile systems and allow foreign inspectors to visit classified facilities (including the Underground Great Wall of China) in order to confirm that the provided information is correct and proper action has been taken under assumed commitments. Besides, China will have to notify other signatories of the commissioning of new nuclear weapons and withdrawal from operational duty or elimination of older systems, the redeployment of weapons, etc. All these measures will make it possible to keep under full control China’s nuclear potential and nuclear arms delivery vehicles.

These measures, understandable from the standpoint of an arms control treaty, may have truly disastrous effects on China’s entire official nuclear policy. Information disclosure and control measures would make China’s nuclear arsenal totally vulnerable to a first nuclear strike and partially – to a non-nuclear strike. A potential aggressor, possessing a considerable advantage in nuclear weapons and full information about the deployment sites, will have a guaranteed capability to destroy the adversary’s entire nuclear potential. Theoretically, it would spend far more nuclear weapons than the victim of the aggression (in this particular case, China) would lose, but still retain an enormous attack potential. In a situation like this, there will be no weapons available to deliver a retaliatory strike. All this will mean that China’s declared no-first-use policy will lose credibility. In other words, it will turn into a propaganda slogan, with no real resources to rely on to implement this policy in practice.

Apparently, it is precisely these considerations that are behind China’s refusal to participate in nuclear arms control talks, and they will remain in place at least until the strategic situation in this field undergoes fundamental change. One of the most important conditions for China to enter into such negotiations (it says so openly) is further reduction of nuclear arsenals by Russia and the United States to levels comparable with China’s potential. As it has been already stated, this condition, described as a political one, has fundamental strategic, military and technical grounds.

LIKELY CONSEQUENCES OF CHINA’S PARTICIPATION IN A NUCLEAR ARMS CONTROL TREATY

As has been said above, China’s consent to enter into nuclear arms control negotiations and conclusion of a corresponding agreement will be unlikely in the foreseeable future. Nevertheless, it is worth pondering on what decisions in the military and political field the Chinese leadership may adopt if it has to give in to U.S. pressure. One of the most important decisions is, to my mind, the possibility of China remaining committed to the no-first-use principle.

Currently, this principle is ensured not so much by the quantitative parameters of China’s nuclear arsenal, but as its stealthy deployment, concealment measures, and refusal to provide relevant information. In order to retain a retaliatory strike potential in a situation where the information about the deployment sites of China’s nuclear forces has been disclosed while the amount of nuclear arms available remains considerably inferior to those of the “partner” or “partners,” China will have to exert major efforts to ensure the invulnerability of at least some of them. Doing this will be impossible without a major buildup of the nuclear potential, above all, of the least vulnerable strategic systems (mobile ICBMs and SLBMs). All of this will require considerable expenses and time. Even if the work on a new treaty takes two or three, or even five years, one can hardly expect any considerable changes in the quantitative and qualitative structure of China’s nuclear forces by the moment this work is finalized.

The problem of strategic nuclear forces’ vulnerability may theoretically be resolved (at least to a certain extent) by developing and deploying missile defenses around deployment sites. But this would entail heavy spending, too. Also, such a program can hardly be implemented within tight deadlines. The problem of greater vulnerability of China’s strategic nuclear forces can also be resolved by adopting the “launch-under-attack” concept or “launch on warning” concept. Their adoption might be considered, although with great reservations, to conform to the no-first-use principle, but in this case it will be essential to build a warning system based on early warning satellites and radars. However, still there will be no guarantees that such a system will be able to issue a timely notification to the military and political leadership of a missile attack against China, if such a strike is carried out with U.S. SLBMs having short flight-in time and counterforce capability. Under such a scenario China’s strategic forces will have to remain on high alert all the time. This means that China will be forced to give up keeping missile warheads in store separately and to deploy them on strategic delivery vehicles, thus demonstrating its readiness for instant retaliation in case of an attack warning.

The above arguments prompt the conclusion that China, if it agrees to the drafting and signing a nuclear arms control treaty, will certainly have to depart from the principle of no-first-use of nuclear weapons, with all the ensuing negative consequences. This may also trigger an enhanced arms race and induce China to adopt more aggressive nuclear arms concepts.

It is nakedly clear that China finds it far easier to refuse to hold nuclear arms control talks than address the adverse military and strategic effects its participation in such an international agreement is bound to entail. In this situation the United States should give more thought to its policy of engaging China in nuclear arms control talks and focus on Russian-U.S. strategic relations, including the prolongation of the New START without any linkages and preconditions.

As far as Russia is concerned, its current policy of avoiding pressure on China to make it engage in nuclear arms talks looks reasonable. From the political standpoint―alongside with other considerations―a trilateral agreement would mean that Russia officially regards China, albeit formally, as a “partner” (if not a “potential adversary”), just as the United States, and that strategic relations among such parties are based on the concept of nuclear deterrence, the balance of nuclear forces, and their capabilities to deliver first and retaliatory strikes. Incidentally, China’s participation would have the same implications for Russia. Lending this dimension to bilateral relations hardly meets the interests of the two countries.

Alexander G. Savelyev, Dr. of Political Science Primakov Institute of World Economy and International Relations, Moscow, Russia Center of International Security Chief Research Fellow

Abstract

Beijing explains its firm unwillingness to join the United States and Russia in nuclear arms control talks by the fact that China’s nuclear arsenal is incomparable with respective potentials of the world’s two leading nuclear powers. China urges Russia and the U.S. to go ahead with the nuclear disarmament process on a bilateral basis, and promises it will be prepared to consider the possibility of its participation in the negotiations only when its counterparts have downgraded their arsenals approximately to China’s level. Washington finds this totally unacceptable and demands that China either join the existing Russian-U.S. strategic New START treaty right away or agree to enter into a trilateral nuclear arms control format. This article studies the prospects of China’s involvement in nuclear arms talks and analyzes the true reasons behind Beijing’s desire to avoid any nuclear disarmament deals at this point. The working hypothesis of this paper is that China’s stance on the above issue is by no means far-fetched or propagandistic, and that it is driven by fundamental political, military and strategic considerations. Disregard for this factor and further forceful efforts to bring China to the negotiating table to discuss nuclear arms control will lead to failure.

Keywords: China, the United States, New START, Russia, nuclear arms control, China’s nuclear doctrine, nuclear disarmament, no-first-use principle.

References

Adamczyk, E., 2019. “China Will Double Its Nuclear Warheads in Next 10 Years,” DIA Chief Says. Defense News, 31 May 31[online]. Available at: <https://www.upi.com/Defense-News/2019/05/31/China-will-double-its-nuclear-warheads-in-next-10-years-DIA-chief-says/1621559319133/> [Accessed 11 May 2020].

Bajrektarevic, A., 2020 “The post-Corona epilogue of Sino-American relationship” http://www.diplomatmagazine.eu/2020/05/03/the-post-corona-epilogue-of-an-overheated-sino-american-relationship-we-have-a-winner-will-we-have-a-game-changer-too/

ECNC, 2020. “China Will Not Join So-Called China-U.S.-Russia Arms Control Negotiations”. ECNC.cn [online]. Available at: <http://www.ecns.cn/news/politics/2020-03-06/detail-ifzuhesu4122041.shtml> [Accessed 20 March 2020].

Fact Sheet China, 2004. Nuclear Disarmament and Reduction of. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China, Fact Sheet China, 27 April. 

Ford, C., 2020. US Priorities for “Next Generation Arms Control”. US Department of State. Arms Control and International Security Papers, 1(1), o6 April, p. 4.

Fravel, M., 2019. China Has Not (Yet) Changed Its Position on Nuclear Weapons. The Diplomat, 22 April [online]. Available at: <https://thediplomat.com/2013/04/china-has-not-yet-changed-its-position-on-nuclear-weapons/> [Accessed 5 May 2020].

Gertz, B., 2020. Envoy Says China Is Key to New Arms Deal with Russia. The Washington Times, 7 May [online]. Available at: <https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/may/7/marshall-billingslea-says-new-start-fate-hangs-chi/> [Accessed May 10, 2020]. 

Giacometti, N., 2014. For Half a Century, China’s Nuclear Strategy Has Been Surprisingly Consistent. Will It Remain So? The Diplomat, 16 October [online]. Available at:

<https://thediplomat.com/2014/10/could-chinas-nuclear-strategy-evolve/> [Accessed 5 May 2020]

Karber, Ph. A., 2011. Strategic Implications of China’s Underground Great Wall. Federation of American Scientists, 11 September [pdf]. Available at: <https://fas.org/nuke/guide/china/Karber_UndergroundFacilities-Full_2011_reduced.pdf> [Accessed June 22, 2020]

Kristensen, H. and Korda, M., 2020. Status of World Nuclear Forces. Federation of American Scientists [online]. Available at: <https://fas.org/issues/nuclear-weapons/status-world-nuclear-forces/> [Accessed 10 August 2020].

Mehta, A., 2020. Arms Control Decisions by Trump Administration Could Be ‘Imminent.’ Will China Be Involved? [online]. Defense News, February 26. Available at: <https://www.defensenews.com/pentagon/2020/02/26/arms-control-decisions-by-trump-administration-could-be-imminent-will-china-be-involved/> [Accessed 11 May 2020].

MFA RF, 2019. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s remarks at the Moscow Nonproliferation Conference “Foreign Policy Priorities of the Russian Federation in Arms Control and Nonproliferation in the Context of Changes in the Global Security Architecture”. 8 November [online]. Available at: <https://www.mid.ru/foreign_policy/news/-/asset_publisher/cKNonkJE02Bw/content/id/3891674> [Accessed 12 April 2020].

Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China, 2019. Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Geng Shuang’s Regular Press Conference on May 6, 2019. [online]. Available at: <https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/2511_665403/t1661163.shtml> [Accessed 11 May 2020].

Pifer, S., 2019. Order from Chaos. Russia’s Shifting Views of Multilateral Nuclear Arms Control with China. Brookings, 19 February [online]. Available at: <https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2020/02/19/russias-shifting-views-of-multilateral-nuclear-arms-control-with-china/> [Accessed June 22, 2020].

Reuters, 2020. Reuters World News official website [online]. 7 May. Available at: <https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia/trump-stresses-desire-for-arms-control-with-russia-china-in-putin-call-idUSKBN22J2GT>. [Accessed 11 May 2020].

Riechmann, D., 2020. Trump Still Hoping for US-Russia-China Nuclear Arms Pact. The Star, 14 February [online]. Available at: <https://www.thestar.com/news/world/us/2020/02/14/trump-still-hoping-for-us-russia-china-nuclear-arms-pact.html> [Accessed 12 April 2020].

Schneider, M. B., 2019. Nuclear Weapons in Chinese Military Strategy. National Institute for Public Policy. Information Series. Issue No. 441, 3 May 3. [online]. Available at: <https://www.nipp.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/IS-441.pdf> [Accessed 11 May 2020].

Tosaki, H., 2019. Nuclear Arms Control in a Post-INF Treaty Period: A Chance to Engage China? The Japan Institute of International Affairs. JIIA Strategic Comments, No. 9, March [online]. Available at: <https://www2.jiia.or.jp/en/article_page.php?id=18> [Accessed 5 May 2010].

The State Council, 2019. Information Office of the People’s Republic of China, 2019. China’s National Defense in the New Era, July. Beijing: Foreign Languages Press Co. Ltd., р. 9.

Xinhuanet.com, 2019. China Pursues Nuclear Strategy of Self-Defense: White Paper. Xinhua,  24 July [online]. Available at: <http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2019-07/24/c_138253330.htm> [Accessed 5 May 2020].

Yoshihara Toshi and Bianchi, J., 2019. Chinese Nuclear Weapons Strategy — Technical-Military Developments and Perceptions of Credibility. Real Clear Defense July 17. <https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2019/07/17/chinese_nuclear_weapons_strategyleaning_towards_a_more_proactive_posture_part_ii_external_drivers_of_potential_changetechnical-military_developments_and_perceptions_of_credibility.html> [Accessed 5 May 2020].

Zhang Hui, 2011. China’s Nuclear Weapons Modernization: Intentions, Drivers, and Trends.  Project on Managing the Atom, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, [online]. Available at: <http://belfercenter.hks.harvard.edu/files/ChinaNuclearModernization-hzhang.pdf> [Accessed June 22, 2020]. 

Zhao, T., 2020. Opportunities for Nuclear Arms Control Engagement with China. Arms Control Today, January/February [online]. Available at: <https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2020-01/features/opportunities-nuclear-arms-control-engagement-china#bio> [Accessed 5 May, 2020].

One of Prague’s largest Baroque monuments, the Invalidovna in the city’s district of Karlín, is set to undergo major renovations. The Czech National Heritage Institute, which administers the building, has just unveiled plans that include striking new extensions made of glass and steel.

The massive Baroque complex Invalidovna is one of the most important works by the renowned Prague-born architect Kilián Ignác Dientzenhofer, best known for St. Nicholas Church in Prague’s Malá Strana quarter. The former home for war veterans was built in the 1830s and was originally intended to be nearly 10 times larger.

Several years ago, the building in the Karlín district became a protected national cultural monument and then entrusted to the National Heritage Institute.

Read more here.

Author: Ruth Fraňková

Every business’s goal is to reach more customers and grow. Making people know who you are and what you offer is one of the most important steps of growing a business and generating more profit.

Investing in expanding your brand presence can position it for success, so we’ve put together a list of effective strategies that will get the word out about your amazing business.

Ready to start new endeavors?

Let’s dig into six brand-building strategies that will help your brand reach new customers and thrive.

1. Establish your brand as an authoritative source of information

Focus on creating high-quality content that adds value to your audience’s lives, and people will genuinely want to consume it and share it. Whether it’s a blog or video content, helping and educating people at no cost will help you strengthen your brand and expand its presence.

Engaging content attracts links and page views, so it’s great for your SEO efforts too.

According to digital marketers, videos are one of the most effective mediums to kindle attraction from customers.

Don’t forget about infographics as they are one of the most shareable content formats too. And when you want to reach new customers, shares are crucial. They build organic reach and allow people beyond your followers to see your content.

2. Focus on branding

Give your brand a unique personality and develop a unique brand voice. It’s a surefire way to make your brand memorable. Strong brand voice, whether funny or smart, tends to stick in consumers’ minds. Always make sure to maintain a consistent brand personality across all your platforms.

Again, videos are great tools to establish a unique brand identity and push your business growth.

With easy-to-use slideshow software, you can create original and engaging video slideshows even if you have zero editing skills. You can add your photos or choose from thousands of stock photos, fine-tune the colors, and add text if you want to.

And in a matter of minutes, you’ll have a beautiful slideshow that will showcase your brand at its best and increase customer reach.

3. Utilize Facebook and Instagram ads

Launching brand-awareness campaigns on these platforms can help your brand grow its following and engagement. The goal is to reach people who might be interested in your business, and Facebook and Instagram allow you to target specific audiences based on their behaviors and preferences.

You can also target audiences based on their age, gender, location, and other features.

According to Facebook, video and carousel ads are the most effective in improving reach. And as a bonus, ads on these social networks are relatively cheap.

4. Partner with reputable influencers

Partnering with your target audience’s favorite creators and influencers is a great way to reach new customers. Recommendations from influencers are perceived as more trustworthy than traditional advertisements.

Influencer marketing platforms like Upfluence and Traackr can help you find the right influencers in relevant industries across all social networks.

There are two ways to expand your brand presence by working with reputable creators.

You can either gift them free products/services in exchange for reviews or partner with them to create appealing content that will resonate with their audience.

5. Introduce a referral program

Make your customers be your brand’s ambassadors! You can quickly increase brand awareness by providing an extra perk to your users for every friend they refer to.

Almost 50 percent of U.S. consumers cite their friends and family as their number one source of brand awareness. So, stimulating word of mouth from your loyal customers can boost your reach and increase the number of people who know about your brand.

And even better – new customers get to know about your offerings from a source they trust, without you having to spend thousands of dollars.

6. Start a podcast

Your own industry podcast is a win-win situation for all. If you interview industry experts and other relevant people, you add value to your consumers’ lives and develop relationships with others in your field while also building your brand.

When you succeed in creating meaningful and useful content people can relate to, they are more likely to remember your brand, recommend it, and become buyers.

If your brand is all about skincare, educate your listeners about the science behind creating effective serums and face creams. Dive into some fun facts about ingredients, or the history of skincare.

Addressing common myths and sticking to science-backed data will help you establish your brand as a trustworthy and authoritative one within your industry.

By Peter Minkoff

Peter is a lifestyle and travel writer at Men-Ual magazine, living between Ústí nad Labem and Antwerp. Follow Peter on Twitter for more tips.

Vice-President of the EU Commission Margaritis Shinas was a keynote speaker at this summer’s Diplomatic Conference in Vienna organised by the International Institute IFIMES, Media Platform Modern Diplomacy and their partners. High dignitary of the Commission seized the occasion to express the EU’s take on the 75th anniversary of victory over fascism, unfolding health crisis and to it related pressure on human and labour rights, as well as on the Union’s continued efforts towards remaining a ‘rock’ amid the volatile climate.

The EU Commission Vice-President Margaritis Shinas addressing the conference

It is known by now – and acknowledged by the EU Commission VP – that the COVID-19 crisis has had some severe implications for Human Rights and, to a lesser extent, for cooperation outlooks. In the face of the first wave, countries in Europe and elsewhere have adopted different courses of actions in order to manage the health crisis and attempt at containing its threats. Placed in an unprecedented situation, governments have undoubtedly each reacted in ways they deemed most appropriate at the time.

However, the pandemic itself topped with the varied policies have caused notable restrictions on Human Rights. Most notoriously, the right to life and that to health have been challenged in extreme circumstances where, at the peak of the crisis, health institutions were so overflowed that the provision of maximal care to every single individual was compromised. The effective and equal access to healthcare has therefore quickly become a central preoccupation of many governments, drawing on some dramatic first-hand experiences.

On that, I will say that if the global health crisis has been a synonym for many negative impacts, it has also been a precious opportunity to rethink carefully the existing narrative of programmatic and progressive rights – such as the right to health – needing no immediate attention, nor realisation. This narrative held predominantly by some Western democracies ever since the adoption of the UN International Covenants, has been unduly weakening the universal and indivisible stance of Human Rights. Needless to say, in adhering to that dangerous narrative, planning for and prioritizing health access, resources and system capabilities is undermined. This, in turn, contributes to the difficult and insufficient responses of some governments that have been witnessed. May the victims of inadequate infrastructures due to an obsolete distinction between rights serve as a poignant reminder: social, cultural and economic rights need be readily available to all.

Equally interesting is the toll taken on a whole other range of Human Rights – an international system built up in last 75 years on the legacy of victory of antifascist forces in Europe and elsewhere. Numerous individual freedoms have also suffered limitations, often as a direct result of actions taken to promote and ensure the right to life and the right to health for the most vulnerable. Indeed, people’s freedom of movement, that of religion (external dimension), that of assembly and association, as well as their procedural rights – only to name a few – have all been greatly affected during the crisis.

Of course voices have raised their discontent at those restrictions put in place to mitigate the crisis, considered by many to be too incisive and too manifold when cumulated. But despite an apparent clash between two groups of interests protected by different rights, the resolution which has emerged from the approaches followed by most countries is very telling. In fact, a balancing exercise revealed that protecting the right to health and to life of the minority of people ought simply to be considered predominant in comparison to the other individual freedoms and rights of the majority. This reasoning, grounded in solidarity and the protection of minorities and vulnerable persons, is in fact very encouraging in an era of growing individualism combined with overwhelming challenges which will certainly require peoples to unite against them.

Nevertheless, this does not take away from the fact that the full and optimal enjoyment of Human Rights has generally been seriously affected as many interests have been caught in the crossfire of the fight against Coronavirus’ harmful effects. Moreover, the crisis has also created some divides amongst European countries. This is because the sanitary emergency has caused for precarious contexts of resources shortages and sometimes unfruitful cooperation, even shift in alliances.

This has naturally brought about separate criticisms and questioning of the EU cooperation strategy and security arrangements. In that sense, growing expectations are felt for the EU to uphold and promote its fundamental values including the rule of law, solidarity, non-discrimination and antifascist line.

Vice-President Schinas is well aware of that reality and reiterates the EU’s unalterable commitment to peaceful cooperation, human dignity, liberty, equality and solidarity in these troubled times. He further ensures that the most recent security strategies led by the Union do not – and never will – eat away at the protection of fundamental rights. What is more, whilst the EU’s arrangements can be seen as slightly ‘under attack’ currently, the VP feels that rather than seeing this period as a high-stakes test on EU democracies it should be seen as an opportunity to take a bigger stand than ever for the European common values and call for strengthened multilateralism. This necessities constructive reciprocal and respectful active engagement with the EU Mediterranean and eastern European neighbourhood.

All that is because it is not too difficult to imagine that the aftermath of the C-19 crisis can open several paths of new dynamics in international relations. Yet, as it cannot be stressed enough, an upcoming change in the conception of relations between nations could be decisive for numerous other contemporary challenges – namely: migration crisis, armed conflicts, climate change. While one of the paths could consist in an increase in protectionism and nationalist attitudes, another one would involve, on the contrary, a shift towards reinforced cooperation and enhanced solidarity. The latter outward approach, advocated by the EU Vice-President and believed to be the best hope for the future, is one deeply enshrined in the antifascist legacy and the very raison d’être of the Union.

Above all, at the occasion of the 75th anniversary of the Victory Day, Excellency Schinas reminds us with much humbleness that the journey for safeguarding Human Rights is one that is perpetually underway.

About the Author:

Nora Wolf, of the Kingston and of Geneva University is a Swiss-based International Politics & Economics specialist. Her expertise includes Human Rights, Humanitarian Law and International Criminal Law in an inter-disciplinary fashion for the EU and the UN-related thinktanks and FORAs.

In several days, the Czech police will start distributing flyers to foreign drivers. According to the statistics, last year they caused 7689 accidents on roads with 48 lethal outcomes. It accounts for nine percent of all victims of the road accidents, which were recorded last year in the Czech Republic.

Zuzana Pidrmanová, Head of the Prevention Department of the Police Presidium of the Czech Republic, stated that awareness and responsibility are required for every driver in their home country and foreign countries, as well.

The police will present the papers in English, German, and Polish languages to drivers on the roads during the usual traffic checks. In addition, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs distributed the materials to various foreign embassies.

The main reasons for road accidents by foreigners are the reduced feeling of responsibility in the foreign country and the lack of understanding of the driving rules of the Czech Republic, stated Roman Budský from the Vize 0 (Vision 0) platform. The goal of the platform is to lower the road accidents and to create safe environment for every driver and pedestrian.

Also, almost 60 percent of road accidents by foreigners were caused by uncareful driving. Alcohol abuse became the reason in seven percent of cases. In total, more than 107 000 road accidents occurred last year.

Yesterday marked the beginning of the European Week of Mobility, a Prague-based event which is supposed to focus on public health and the quality of mobility in European cities. Organizers will discuss the effect of different transportation on the infrastructure of the city and on citizens’ health, as well emotional stability of the those using the transport. The event will have special statues to commemorate the lives of the 25 and 8 pedestrians respectively, who became victims of traffic accidents in 2018 and 2019 in Prague.

Source

The Eastern Mediterranean region is currently experiencing a new cycle of tensions between Turkey and Greece, which belong to the same system and are members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization NATO. While the dispute revolves around natural resources, such as natural gas, it essentially boils down to flaring up of old historical enmities rooted in the agreement that established the current borders of the Republic of Turkey after the fall of the Ottoman Empire. Namely, the Turkish government wishes to rectify that historic (in)justice. As historical memory still leaves a trace on the presence, the current tensions in the Eastern Mediterranean, between Turkey and Greece, are not related just to the natural resources discovered over the past few years, but have roots in historical disputes dating back almost an entire century.

Over the past years the Eastern Mediterranean region has turned into a war zone because of the war in Syria and the intervention by international factors, particularly the US and Russia. After the Syrian crisis had, relatively, calmed down and is in a status quo phase, a new/old crisis, that is conflict, emerged over natural gas and maritime border.

Two alliances in the Mediterranean region

The region is now divided between two alliances. While Greece has the support of France, Egypt and Cyprus, Turkey enjoys relative support from the US, as well as some Arab countries, such as Libya, Algeria and Qatar. The dispute revolves around delineation of territorial waters in the Mediterranean Sea, where the territorial waters overlap and intersect. The UN Convention on Law of the Sea from 1982[2] cannot give a final answer with respect to the existing dispute. The situation suddenly deteriorated after the discovery of natural gas, which is gaining increasing economic and geostrategic relevance.

The new escalation in relations between Athens and Ankara came after Turkey announced commencement of exploration of oil and gas resources in the Eastern Mediterranean. Specifically, in an area around 180 kilometers from the Greek island of Kastellorizo. Turkey asserts that the exploration efforts are taking place in its continental shelves, while Greece insists that the disputed area is located exclusively within its economic zone.

The dispute could escalate because of the strong stances of both sides, which do not rule out the possibility of a military solution. Precedents harbinger a real threat, because Turkey shot down a Russian Suhoj-24 aircraft, when it came close to the Turkish air space on 24 November 2015. The operation was conducted despite the Russian military presence in Syria and the Mediterranean. Another incident occurred in June 2020, when the Turkish frigate almost targeted a French warship, which was a part of the Operation Irini[3], when it tried to intercept a Turkish ship that was transporting weapons to Libya.

The causes of the current tensions in the Mediterranean can be categorized into four main groups: historical (in)justice (Turkish stance); rich natural resources, (primarily gas) and regional leadership; and Turkish internal political purposes.

Historical (in)justice

Many countries complain about injustices related to the agreements that they had signed in the past or were forcibly imposed on them. This explains current disagreements among a catalogue of countries, i.e., Morocco and Algeria, Pakistan and India, Iraq and Kuwait, and even countries in Latin America, i.e. Bolivia, which has aspirations related to the part of the Pacific Ocean it lost to Chile at the beginning of the last century.

In the case of Turkey, the issue of maritime border of the island of Kastellorizo, which lies only 2km off the Turkish coast and 570km from Athens, has now been made topical.

Ankara believes that the Treaty of Lausanne (2) from 1923, which defined the current borders of the Republic of Turkey, according to which many islands in the vicinity of its coast were given to Greece, was unjust.

As the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea from 1982 gave the islands a right to exclusive economic zones, the Greek economic zones of these islands spread out all the way to the Turkish coast.

Although under the leadership of Kemal Ataturk Turkey gained the most from the Treaty of Lausanne (2) from 1923, it also lost dozens of islands and islets (rocks in the sea) to Greece. One should not neglect the fact that the Treaty only partly rectified the injustice made to Turkey by the Treaty of Sèvres from 1920.

The Turkish public now speaks only of the Mediterranean island of Kastellorizo and very little of the 18 islands in the Aegean Seam that the Turkish Government was forced to relinquish to Greece, in order to continue the talks on integration into the European Union.

After Turkey yielded the islands, the European Union (EU) renewed the membership talks with Turkey on 17 December 2004, as Greece and Cyprus had refrained from using the right of “veto” on continuation of the process of integration of Turkey into the EU.

Natural resources – gas

In early 21st century, natural gas, as a source of energy, started to become increasingly important, just like oil did in mid last century, and became the main engine of establishment of new geo-political alliances.

EU supports Greece in the dispute with Turkey, hoping that Athens would get the natural gas fields, so that it could reduce its dependency on gas, which is mainly supplied from Russia. This strategy is primarily supported by France, and to a lesser extent by Italy and Germany.

Hence, in a way, the EU has sided with Greece and while some EU members are threatening Turkey with sanctions, other, such as Spain, do not support confrontation with Turkey.

The US understanding and support for Turkey are related to the presence of Russia and its ambitions in the region. The US perceives Turkey as an ally that can oppose the plans of Moscow to penetrate the entire Mediterranean from its base in the port of Tartus in Syria. In early June 2020, the US blessed Turkish military assistance to the internationally recognized government in Tripoli, as the renegade General Khalifa Haftar has military and political cooperation with Russia.

In late August 2020, USS Winston S. Churchill destroyer-ship joined the Turkish military exercise in the vicinity of the island of Crete in a mission focused on development of partner capabilities using NATO operational and tactical procedures.

Regional leadership and rivalry

Unlike the Western Mediterranean, where for the time being there is a high level of stability and cooperation among north-coast countries (France, Spain and Italy) and south-coast countries (Morocco and Algeria), the Eastern Mediterranean is going through a kind of groundbreaking changes and establishment of strategic balance as a result of the new Russian concentration of forces in Syria and the Turkish aspiration to be the leader in the region. On the other side, France is trying to prevent that by siding with Greece.

The project of Turkish leadership in the Eastern Mediterranean region is Turkish project, supported by both secularists and conservatives. It dates from early eighties of the last century, when the Turkish military and diplomacy envisaged difficulties in the realization of their dream of European integration into and membership in the EU. Turkey has been pursuing this project for quite some time already and President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has only accelerated it by capitalizing on the progress achieved in all the areas, starting from economic to military, and seizing the geopolitical contradiction in the region. This project will continue and will not be halted with the departure of the current President of Turkey because it is deeply rooted in the Turkish national consciousness.

Turkish internal-political purposes

For five consecutive months already, the public opinion pollshave shown a drop in the popularity of the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP), headed by President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and an increase in the popularity of traditional opposition parties and two new parties, which were established by former AKP senior officials, AliBabacan and Ahmet Davutoğlu.

The ruling AKP party uses the current tensions in the Mediterranean to consolidate its ranks, particularly in Istanbul and Ankara, where the mayors, members of the opposition, have leverage because of the crisis in the Turkish economy caused by the Covid-19 pandemic.

Germany, which chairs the EU in the second half of 2020, took a mediator role so that the crisis in the Mediterranean does not get out of control. In August 2020, German Minister of Foreign Affair Heiko Maas visited both Ankara and Athens to try to overcome the tensions in the Eastern Mediterranean region in relation to the maritime delineations and exploration of sources of energy.

The strategic options that the EU has at its disposal in dealing with Erdogan are very limited, because the membership talks with Turkey had been frozen for an indefinite period. The option of threats with economic sanctions would definitely not be effective because the sanctions would harm the European companies, primarily those from Germany. Namely, half of Turkish foreign trade exchange is with EU countries.

Analysts of the IFIMES international institute believe that devising of a solution for mitigation of the escalating tensions in the Eastern Mediterranean will not be a simple or easy task. It is believed that according to international treaties there are dozens of islands in the Aegean Sea under Greek sovereignty that are close to the Turkish coast (Greece has 1,200-6,000 islands), and according to the relevant laws each of these islands has its territorial waters and an exclusive economic zone. The existing legal dilemma can be solved exclusively through negotiations of the two parties on resolution of historical facts, which have also become geopolitical.

In the process of delineation of epicontinental shelves of these islands and the exclusive economic zones between Greece and Turkey within the framework of decisions of the international court and UN Convention and in keeping with the international law, it is necessary to also take into account justice and fairness

Ljubljana/Brussels/Washington/Athens/Ankara, 6 September 2020

Footnotes:

[1] IFIMES – International Institute for Middle East and Balkan Studies, based in Ljubljana, Slovenia, has Special Consultative status at ECOSOC/UN, New York, since 2018.

[2] The United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) is an agreement adopted at the Third UN Conference on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS III). It was opened for signature, together with the Final Act of the Conference, in Montego Bay, Jamaica in 1982. The Convention entered into force in 1994. Greece ratified the agreement on 21 July 1995. Turkey, which is not a signatory to the Convention, accepts its provisions as a reflection of general customary law.

[3] The European Union Naval Force Mediterranean Operation IRINI (EUNAVFOR MED IRINI) was launched on 31 March 2020 with the aim to enforce the United Nations arms embargo to Libya. Operation IRINI is a European Union military operation under the umbrella of the Common Security and Defense Policy (CSDP).

Kraig’s family has a long history of barbering beginning with his grandfather back in 1914. He grew up around his grandfather’s and father’s barbershops in Kentucky training with them from an early age, then completing his training at some of the world ́s top hair styling academies.

Before moving to Prague, Kraig worked with his brother at their Atlanta location. Starting a new life and a new barber shop in Prague, Kraig is as passionate about barbering now as he was when he began over 40 years ago.

Kraig is featured in magazines and on TV in both the Czech Republic and Germany including a TV documentary about his life in Prague and has been recognized as one of the Europe ́s top barbers by Barbers Quarterly magazine.

The Czech Republic is full of opportunity and, in my humble opinion, it’s the new “land of opportunity “, a title historically held by the USA. I didn’t move from the US because of any negative views I may have held, rather I moved to the Czech Republic because of the lifestyle and opportunity available here.

Opportunities that would have been more difficult or possibly out of reach in the US are much more achievable here. I’m embarrassed to say that I still don’t speak Czech and that does present some barriers but it doesn’t mean we can’t find ways around these barriers. For example, over the last 5 years I have been hosting videos and TV. Now, I did not have experience in this previously but the videos were a success and it led to projects with Ceska Televize and Stream.cz. Having no real language skills, I was able to make the right contacts and find the right angle to where it not only made sense to use a native English speaker to host the shows but it was the positive because it made it more unique. I’m constantly refining my brand. I’m known as the American Barber in Prague. My background and heritage has been my core business and image although I have consistently branched out of this into promoting classic men’s lifestyle. One of the ways I have done this is forming a cooperation with Jack Daniels. It would have been difficult for me to get a meeting with JD in the US and negotiating with them would have been much more intimidating. Here, I was able to obtain the initial contact and then when I was asked how I thought we might be able to cooperate, I explained how it made sense to use me. I’m American but I’m also a southerner. I grew up just a few hours away from the Jack Daniels distillery. I have quite a bit of knowledge in regards to bourbon and Jack Daniels. My clientele is the same demographic that they are targeting and I’m in the media both here in the Czech Republic and Germany. Then I went on to explain various ways we could cooperate, one of which was for them to make me a Jack Daniels ambassador. From this, they paid to build a Gentleman Jack bar in my barbershop and provided me with whiskey. The other thing they provided me with, by making me an ambassador, is the brand association that is of great value when I’m negotiating other partnerships. This has led to many cooperations in both the hair industry and lifestyle brands like Indian motorcycles.

The Czech Republic is a small country and Prague is a big village. Instead of 6 degrees of separation it’s more like 2. I find the Czech people very open, friendly and approachable. Whether it be a shop keeper or a former president I introduce myself and many friendships have been formed in this way. Not everything is about business. Gaining new friends has its own value but the more you widen your circle the more opportunities you will come in contact with. If we keep our eyes open and listen, the potential opportunities will present themselves because this truly is a “land of opportunity“.

By Kraig Casebier

americanbarberinprague.com

The Czech Republic is increasingly becoming a target for illegal dumping of waste from across the border, the website iDnes.cz reported on Wednesday. Czechs have been dealing with illegal waste imports for many years now, but recently the activity of waste smugglers has intensified. A new legislation is currently being prepared to help authorities tackle the problem.

According a report by the Ministry of Interior “there is a real threat that the Czech Republic could become, or is already turning into one of the target countries, where organised crime groups import waste to be dumped.”

The increasing amount of illegal waste imports is also confirmed by customs officials.

“Last year, the Customs Administration of the Czech Republic recorded 52 illegal imports of rubbish, which is more than twice as much as in the previous year,” the administration’s spokeswoman Martina Kaňková told the website iDnes, adding that the real number is likely to be much higher.

During the first half of 2020, customs officials revealed 460 tonnes of rubbish illegally imported from across the border, despite the closure of borders during the coronavirus lockdown.

According to Radka Nastoupilová, spokeswoman of the Czech Environmental Inspectorate, most of the illegal waste is imported to the Czech Republic from Germany, Italy and Austria.

“The illegal imports comprise both grounded and ungrounded mixtures of communal plastic waste, mixed municipal waste, including rubber, timber and paper as well as remains of electronic devices,” she told the website.

She also said capturing offenders is very complicated due to the open borders within the EU.

The rubbish ends up either in incineration plants or on illegal waste dump sites, which are often located in unused warehouses. Last year, the Czech Environmental Inspectorate uncovered nine such sites.

Until 2018, most of Europe’s non-recyclable waste, including cardboard and textiles, was imported to China. But at the end of 2018, Beijing introduced strict limits on imports of foreign waste, putting an end to the practice.

The lower house of Parliament is currently debating a proposed legislation , which would introduce a complete ban on the dumping of certain types of waste and also increase fees on landfilling.

Author:
Ruth Fraňková

Source

Parliamentary elections in Montenegro are scheduled to take place on 30 August 2020. The electoral roll contains the names of 541,232 eligible voters. The ballots include 12 election lists (six coalitions and six parties). Montenegro has a proportional system in which the entire country is one electoral unit. At the elections the voters shall elect 81 representatives in the Montenegrin Parliament. The election threshold is 3%. Simultaneously with parliamentary elections, local elections will be held in the Kotor, Budva, Andrijevica and Gusinje municipalities.

The IFIMES international institute earlier published analyses of developments in Montenegro titled: “2020 Montenegro: End of Milo Đukanović’s Era”, link: https://www.ifimes.org/en/9881, “2020 Montenegro: Noose is tightening around Milo Đukanović”, link: www.ifimes.org/ba/9829, “2020 Western Balkans: Attempt at repeating history”, link: https://www.ifimes.org/en/9878.

Montenegro acts as Austria did after World War II

The election campaign is being conducted in an atmosphere of unequal competition because the ruling Democratic Party of Socialists (DPS) has unlimited human and financial resources at its disposal and (ab)uses its multi-decade-long ruling position for the purposes of its election campaign.

Furthermore, the Democratic Party of Socialists (DPS) and its president Milo Đukanović promote on daily basis the story about alleged endangerment of the statehood of Montenegro by the so-called great-Serbia project, Serb Orthodox Church and Russia. It is important to emphasize that Montenegro is a NATO member and that nobody will attack it, as well as that with the departure of Milo Đukanović it will progress faster towards the EU. In fact, Montenegro and its citizens are most endangered by Milo Đukanović’s regime as while over the past 31 years it has constantly promised better standards of living and living conditions, in reality it has plundered and looted the country in every respect. At the same time, according to publicly available data[2], Milo Đukanović lumps together with the wealthiest presidents in the world. Although Montenegro is a NATO member, Russian agents are infiltrated in the security-intelligence-defense system. Furthermore, Montenegro is also economically tied to Russia, because 20% of companies are in Russian[3] ownership (and 20% of companies are owned by citizens of Serbia), while China has control over the public finances through the loan it gave for construction of the highway. Namely, it controls the key investment, the Bar-Boljare[4] highway, which can jeopardize the public finances of Montenegro. The construction of the highway has increased the foreign debt to above 70% of the gross domestic product. In fact, the Montenegro’s Government had embarked on this project despite the strong warnings from Brussels and Washington. Montenegro has constantly been criticized by the EU and US for the above listed facts and the western allies are now looking for a person and/or political option that would be able to stop the continuous political tensions in Montenegro and finally initiate a showdown with Milo Đukanović’s crimes, which are of international scale.

Prof.Dr. Žarko Puhovski[5] offered an illustrative description of the war legacy and conduct of the regime in Montenegro when he said: “One should not forget that in the meantime Montenegro (headed by Đukanović) begun to act in the same way as Austria did after World War II. Namely, it declared itself the first victim of Milošević, just as Austria declared itself the first victim of Hitler, but not also an accomplice in the war, which is what Austria and Montenegro were in these two respective cases”. Even today, Đukanović “sells” such a policy to the Bosniaks and Albanians, not just in Montenegro- but they have finally seen through all Đukanović’s deceptions and falsehoods.

Vatican did not deny establishment of Montenegro’s Orthodox Uniate Church

The issue of the canonically recognized Serb Orthodox Church and the unrecognized Montenegrin Orthodox Church is one of the central internal political issues in Montenegro.

The statement by Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew[6], that he would not recognize the Montenegrin Orthodox Church and that the Serbian Orthodox Church was the only canonically recognized church in Montenegro was a clear signal to Đukanović, to pursue another scenario- which is the uniatization of the Montenegrin Orthodox Church. The canonical recognition of the Montenegrin Orthodox Church would be done through uniatization (Greek-Catholic Church), so the Montenegrin church would retain the “Eastern rite“, but its head would be the Bishop of Rome- the Pope. The Montenegrin Orthodox Church would be under the canonical jurisdiction of Vatican. In such a way, Đukanović would attempt to reclaim the lost favor of the West, and the Montenegrin Orthodox Church would ensure its canonical recognition. Hence, such a scenario would help Đukanović “ingratiate” himself to the West, particularly the Catholic Europe.

Analysts warn that so far the official Vatican has never denied the option that the Montenegrin Orthodox Church could become Uniate church under the auspices of the universal Roman Catholic Church. While the Americans are particularly sensitive to the issue of religious freedoms, which is one of the founding principles of the American society, the Montenegrin authorities treat this issue as an administrative/technocratic issue because the Democratic Party of Socialists gotten involved in the issue of establishment of the Montenegrin Orthodox Church, which is a global unicum. Specifically, to have a political party establish a church or a religious community.

Although Đukanović is officially in conflict with the Serb Orthodox Church, he had remained in contact and held clandestine meetings with the Metropolitan of Montenegro and Littoral Amfilohije Radović of the Serb Orthodox Church. He also sought support of official Belgrade and promised to modify the Law on freedom of religion after the elections. This does not come as a surprise because Đukanović plays more than one game and plays with everyone. Furthermore, his recent decision to send a new Montenegrin Ambassador[7] to the Russian Federation and the message conveyed to the “brotherly Russia” on that occasion caused dismay in EU diplomatic circles. According to some information a major agreement has been made with Metropolitan Amfilohije in relation to the property of the Serb Orthodox Church in Montenegro.

The major agreement with Metropolitan Amfilohije is a prelude to majorization of other ethnic groups and there are already speculations about the position and future of ethnic minorities, particularly Bosniaks. Namely, according to some projections the number of Bosniaks, which Đukanović’s regime has artificially divided to Bosniaks, Muslims and Montenegrins of Islamic faith, should be reduced to 3% over a period of 20 to 30 years. Albanians, whose share in the population structure is declining, are in a similar situation. The process of montenegrization of the ethnically non-Montenegrin population, which could include the Serbs as well, is present.

Opening of boarders for additional voters, not tourists

The authorities in Montenegro opened the Montenegrin borders for tourists, allegedly, on 15 August 2020. Although the epidemiological situation is not at a satisfactory level (high level of Covid-19 epidemic). The tourist season is at a level of 10% of the last year’s. The true intention behind the decision of the government to open the borders is to bring to Montenegro additional voters from neighboring countries and through neighboring countries on the day of elections. These activities were preceded by issuing of additional identification cards for the new voters, on which there is material evidence and even video recordings.

The population of Montenegro is in the area of 622,000, while there are 540,026 registered voters. The number of population of age from 0 to 18 is in the area of 140,000. Hence, as the eligible voters are citizens of full age (541.232), if we add to the number of citizens of full age the number of citizens of age 0 to 18 years, then it appears that the population of Montenegro is almost 700,000. Nongovernmental organizations have detected thousands of phantom voters on the electoral roll, as well as voters who had been registered twice and deceased voters. Furthermore, thousands of voters will have difficulties exercising their voting right due to the unlawful decisions that had transferred them to other polling stations, as a result of what many will not be able to exercise their voting right. It was also established that in the municipalities near the border a number of persons who do not have a residence in Montenegro and should have already been removed from the electoral roll are still registered as voters. The modifications to the law restricted public control of the electoral roll, due to what currently only the ruling DPS party, which also controls the Montenegro Ministry of Internal Affairs, has full access to the central electoral roll.

Analysts believe that the biggest responsibility for the central electoral roll rests with the Montenegro Ministry of Internal Affairs. The Ministry is headed by Mevludin Nuhodžić (DPS), who will have problems avoiding being held accountable for numerous manipulations with the electoral roll and the election process, as well as the fact that, together with the National Security Agency (ANB), the Montenegro Ministry of Internal Affairs is just a service provider for mafia-criminal structures. As Milo Đukanović’s regime has made all the necessary preparations for issuing of new temporary identification cards that are to be used at the elections and the arrival of additional voters to the country, it is necessary to ensure that opposition parties have their observers at the border crossings in order to establish the number and control arrival of additional voters. According to some estimates, there could be at least 50,000 of them.

Đukanović a prime witness for success of the work of KSC-SPO

Analysts believe that Milo Đukanović could soon appear in The Hague as a defense witness in the trial of Kosovo President Hashim Thaçi (PDK), who has been indicted[8] for war crimes on Kosovo before the Kosovo Specialist Chambers and Specialist Prosecutor’s Office (KSC-SPO). Namely, Thaçi is accused for a number of crimes against humanity and war crimes, including murder, enforced disappearance of persons, persecution and torture. The indictment stipulates that Hashim Thaçi, Kadri Veseli (PDK) and the other charged suspects are criminally responsible for nearly 100 murders. The victims of criminal offenses stipulated in the indictment include hundreds of persons whose identity is known and who include Kosovo Albanians, Serbs, Roma and persons of other ethnicities, including political opponents. Đukanović is the prime witness, that is the most important witness- an insider, because he is the only senior official from former Yugoslavia, as the then President of the Montenegrin Government, who has not been indicted so far and has not appeared as a witness before the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY). Hence the success of the work of the KSC-SPO depends to a large extent on Đukanović’s insider testimony, which is why Đukanović is demonstrating reluctance, fear and panic. Milo Đukanović’s appearance before the tribunal in The Hague will finally expose his role in the key developments on the Balkans, including responsibility for the war crimes that had been committed.

Because of his war-time role and history, Đukanović is connected with the war crimes that were committed in Montenegro, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, as well as partly on Kosovo.

Will EU recognize the results of elections in Montenegro?

A comparison between Belarus and Montenegro offers an excellent illustration and analysis whether EU has double standards for Belarus President Alexander Lukashenko and Montenegro President Milo Đukanović (DPS), whose regime has been in power for 31 years in Montenegro. Furthermore, Đukanović, as the commander in chief one of the NATO armies, is being directly connected with the war crimes committed from 1991 to 1995, as well as (international) crime and corruption. His Defense Minister is being connected with the “White Eagles” (Beli orlovi) paramilitary unit, which committed numerous crimes during the wars in former Yugoslavia. At the same time, Montenegro has become a full-fledged member of NATO, which is the strongest military political alliance and attaches major importance to fulfillment of democratic standards. As a result, Đukanović is an “open issue” for NATO leadership because he seriously undermines the image and credibility of NATO, particularly in South East Europe.

The publicized public opinion polls forecast a high turnout at the upcoming elections, which is to exceed 70%. The balance of forces between the regime’s ruling block and the opposition is currently in favor of the opposition. Although the DPS has unlimited financial and other resources at its disposal it could win only in case of (pre)election manipulations and election fraud. According to the polls, the Democratic Party of Socialists can win 25 mandates the most and everything above that would be a result of election fraud.

Analysts pose the following question, will the EU recognize the results of parliamentary elections in Montenegro, which are to take place on 30 August 2020, and then convene an extraordinary summit of the EU, as it did in the case of presidential elections in Belarus, and act in line with the same analogy because of the rigged and irregular elections by Đukanović’s regime, because anything over 25 mandates would be an indication of election fraud.

Another parallel between the Belarus leader Lukashenko and Montenegro president Đukanović is related to their long “service” in top positions in their respective countries. However, the period of Đukanović’s regime is five years longer than Lukashenko’s and Lukashenko was not involved in commission of war crimes, unlike Đukanović.

Is Montenegro entering its most uncertain period?

Opening of the international investigation into the illegal drug trade and drug further complicates the position of Milo Đukanović and his regime, as in international circles he is dubbed “unit measurement for crime”.

Analysts believe that in case of election theft and staged victory of Milo Đukanović, that is the Democratic Party of Socialists, at the upcoming parliamentary elections, Montenegro would enter the most uncertain period in its history. Not just because the EU would maybe not recognize the elections, but also because, in the long run, continuation of the dictatorship and rule of Milo Đukanović’s regime would be a threat to peace and security in Europe.

Montenegrin citizens feel fear and fatigue of the 31-year-long and the longest regime in Europe. A change in power would mean a positive turning point for this smallest country on the Balkans, because it would speed up its integration into the EU, as well as relax the relations in the West Balkans region. The first day after the elections will reveal whether other political parties in Montenegro have the democratic capacity and are ready to abandon and refuse cooperation with the regime, that is the Democratic Party of Socialists (DPS).

Ljubljana/Brussels/Washington/Podgorica, 27 August 2020

Footnotes:

[1] IFIMES – International Institute for Middle East and Balkan Studies, based in Ljubljana, Slovenia, has Special Consultative status at ECOSOC/UN, New York, since 2018.

[2] Source: https://www.dan.co.me/?nivo=3&rubrika=Vijest%20dana&clanak=647831&datum=2018-05-26

[3] Source: https://www.bankar.me/2018/07/23/rusi-vlasnici-20-odsto-firmi-u-crnoj-gori/

[4] The research conducted by the Center for Global Development from Washington identified Montenegro as one of the eight countries faced with the risk of not being able to service their public debt because of their projects related to China. The other seven countries are: Pakistan, Tajikistan, Kirgizstan Mongolia, Lao, Maldives and Djibouti. (link: https://www.slobodnaevropa.org/a/kina-crna-gora-auto-put/30144498.html, link: https://www.slobodnaevropa.org/a/bar-boljare-autoput-do-du%C5%BEni%C4%8Dkog-ropstva-/29435614.html ).

[5] Source: https://pescanik.net/polovan-narod-i/

[6] Source: https://www.rts.rs/page/stories/sr/story/11/region/3571287/vaseljenski-patrijarh-djukanovicu-priznajemo-samo-mitropoliju-crnogorsko-primorsku.html

[7] President Milo Đukanović and the newly appointed Montenegro Ambassador to Russia Milorad Šćepanović agreed that with the aim of overcoming the current situation and modernizing its bilateral relations with Russia, Montenegro is ready to work on normalization and strengthening of these relations, in accordance with the long tradition of friendly relations. (link: http://rs.n1info.com/Region/a626915/Djukanovic-Crna-Gora-je-spremna-za-normalizaciju-i-jacanje-odnosa-sa-Rusijom.html ).

[8] Source: https://www.scp-ks.org/en/press-statement According to the reports, Hashim Thaçi and Kadri Veseli are believed to have carried out a secret campaign to overturn the law creating the Court and otherwise obstruct the work of the Court in an attempt to ensure that they do not face justice. By taking these actions, Thaçi and Veseli have put their personal interests ahead of the victims of their crimes, the rule of law, and all people of Kosovo.

By Nora Wolf

Early summer days of 2020 in Vienna sow marking the anniversary of Nuremberg Trials with the conference “From the Victory Day to Corona Disarray: 75 years of Europe’s Collective Security and Human Rights System – Legacy of Antifascism for the Common Pan-European Future”. This was the first public and probably the largest conference in Europe past the early spring lockdown. It gathered numerous speakers and audience physically in the venue while many others attended online.

The conference was organised by four partners; the International Institute IFIMES, Media Platform Modern Diplomacy, Academic Journal European Perspectives, and Action Platform Culture for Peace, with the support of the Diplomatic Academy of Vienna that hosted the event in a prestigious historical setting.

Lizzie O’Shea addressing the Conference

Media partners were diplomatic magazines of several countries, and the academic partners included over 25 universities from all 5 continents, numerous institutes and 2 international organisations. A day-long event was also Live-streamed, that enabled audiences from Chile to Far East and from Canada to Australia to be engaged with panellists in the plenary and via zoom. (the entire conference proceedings are available: https://www.facebook.com/DiplomaticAcademyVienna )

Among 20-some speakers from Canada to Australia, talking in three event’s panels was also the well know author and Human Rights activist Dr. Lizzie O’Shea. This text is a brief reference on her highly anticipated and absorbing speech prepared exclusively for this conference.

Some argue that with the advent of the numeric age, privacy is dead and the sooner we accept it; the sooner we can all move past our frivolous concerns of personal data misuses and what is really just a reluctance on our part to change. As such, privacy decline and the related loss of control would merely constitute an inevitable consequence of the world’s digitalization.

Others seem to think that Europe is at the forefront of the fight to preserve its constituents’ privacy – GDPR, after all, is proof of that. Moreover, article 8 of the ECHR combined with the Court’s evolutionary jurisprudence on the topic are robust safeguards in place ensuring that people’s privacy remains bulletproof and a top priority.

While it is true that on the outset Europe has been conceived as a ‘leader’ for its – at the time undoubtedly ground-breaking – Data Protection Regulation Act and other national initiatives stemming from the consolidated efforts of EU institutions, such a crucial multi-dimensional and far-reaching right as privacy requires more steps from each governments, we argue here.

First, in our ever-fast-changing digital world, where privacy is threatened in more ways than we could predict, it is the States’ place to be in the first line of defence: they shall be accountable and actively responsible for the protection – or lack thereof – of their citizens’ privacy. Indeed, State obligations remains unchanged, that is to respect, protect and fulfil. Needless to say, the heavy and complex task of defending the integrity of one’s privacy, surely, cannot simply fall onto each and every individual’s shoulders.

That being said, if and when governments decide to get more involved and concerned with overall privacy challenges we face, a risk of considerable concentration of power arises and ought to be managed as well.

Lizzie O’Shea, Human Rights lawyer and writer, effectively underlines some of the shortcomings of the current EU approach to privacy in her intervention during the Vienna Diplomatic Conference of July 2020. More precisely, she hints at the dangers of the current power balance being held by Governments and the absence of a corresponding amount of accountability. She suggests that it reflects an overwhelming trust of the people in their State leading to an erosion of any culture of criticism. This phenomenon of “complacency”, as O’Sheal phrases it, whilst seemingly perhaps counter-intuitive, is not in fact desirable. Criticism of one’s own government policies and, thereby entertaining public debates on State strategies, is an essential component of militant democracies and vital contribution to checks and balances.

Even more pressing, another consequence derived from the current European States’ penchant for power monopoly in deciding privacy management is the wide door opened to state surveillance and abuses. Let us be clear: GDPR is of no help in terms of citizens’ safeguards against governmental intrusions in privacy and abusive use of personal data. This is why it is time to remind ourselves that protection of our fundamental right to privacy ought to be guaranteed against businesses, other private parties, and State actions.

Another criticism that aims to be constructive for the further shaping of our European approach to privacy is the common restricted conception of privacy as a B2C relationship. The GDPR’s architecture revolves around the assumption that privacy issues solely regard individual rights, individual situations, and individual informed consent. There is no acknowledgment of, or infrastructures related to, any type of collective dimension. And while there is no question that individual, case-by-case informed consent represents a corner-stone in privacy protection policies, it is also insufficient in view of the overall goal that is to build a global online community that respects privacy in its fullest form.

So how can we truly be content with an individualistic-only, corporates are the villains-only plan to counter and mitigate the multiplying threats to our wholesome privacies? Perhaps this will serve as food for thoughts and refuel some welcome public debate on the matter.

About the Author:

Nora Wolf, of the Kingston and of University of Geneva is a Swiss-based International Politics & Economics specialist. Her expertise includes Human Rights, Humanitarian Law and International Criminal Law in an inter-disciplinary fashion for the EU and the UN-related thinktanks and FORAs.

The Czech National Agency for International Education (DZS) released results of a research conducted among foreign university students in the Czech Republic. It was focused on evaluation of life and study quality in the Czech Republic. A representative sample of 10,248 respondents makes it the largest survey of its kind ever conducted in the Czech Republic.

Who are foreign students in the Czech Republic / Czech foreign students’ characteristics

Since 2000, when the SIMS statistics began to monitor the number of foreign university students in the Czech Republic, the number has been increasing constantly. As there are fewer Czech university students every year due to the demographic development, the share of foreign students is also growing in the total number. Currently, 16 % of university students in the Czech Republic are foreigners; almost a half of them (44.8 %) comes from Slovakia. The second most represented group are students from Russia (13.2%), followed by students from Ukraine (7.8%), Kazakhstan (4.2%) and India (2%). More than three quarters of students participating in the survey study their study programme in the Czech language. “Apart from Slovaks, students studying in Czech are mostly from the countries of the former Soviet Union, such as Russia, Ukraine or Kazakhstan, who speak Slavic languages or have a good knowledge of Russian,” Soňa Lippmann, Head of the Department of Internationalization of Studies commented.

Why foreigners choose to study in the Czech Republic

One of the examined areas was the students’ motivation to study in the Czech Republic. The answers indicate that one of the most important factors is specific study programmes (49 % of answers). In addition to the study programme, the most common reasons for deciding to study in the Czech Republic are: a specific university (46 %), the geographical location of the country (32 %), relatively low living costs (26 %), low or absent tuition fees (25 %), good security situation (20 %) and friends and family living in the Czech Republic (18 %). Regional differences can be observed in the motives for choosing to study in the Czech Republic – while Slovak students have a good knowledge of Czech universities and awareness of the quality of a particular university plays a crucial role in their decision-making, students in English study programmes emphasize the financial affordability of studying in the Czech Republic.

How foreign students evaluate the study quality in the Czech Republic

International students are generally satisfied with the equipment of classrooms and laboratories (89 %) and the quality of study materials (84 %), although there is a relatively large difference between students studying in English (74% satisfaction with study materials) and Czech (88% satisfaction). Students are slightly less satisfied with faculty staff approach to their needs (75 %) – again, students studying in English are slightly less satisfied (64 % compared to 79 % of students studying in Czech) –, and also with the interconnectedness to work experience in the study programme (70% of students are satisfied or rather satisfied). “Generally, Slovak students are among the most satisfied, which may be caused mainly by linguistic and cultural proximity and similarity of the Czech and Slovak higher education systems. On the contrary, German students are the least satisfied,” Jakub Tesař, Head of the DZS higher education department explained.

Three quarters of foreign students (74 %) evaluate the share of high-quality teachers at their university as 70 % or higher. If we compare these results with the satisfaction with the quality of teaching based on the pan-European Eurostudent research , according to which a quarter of Czech students are rather dissatisfied with the quality of teaching, the overall satisfaction of foreign students is slightly higher. The best rated study fields are law, information and communication technology, and art.

Satisfaction with the students’ Czech experience is reflected in their willingness to recommend study in the Czech Republic to their friends and acquaintances. While Slovak students are generally satisfied and are therefore inclined to do so (97%), students from Western Europe are slightly less inclined to recommend study in the Czech Republic (75%), as are the students from India or the Middle East (76%). However, in general, 9 out of 10 foreign students would recommend study in the Czech Republic.

Integration of foreign students into the Czech community

We can argue that about two thirds of foreign students are successfully integrated among Czech students. Naturally, inclusion is easier for students from Slovakia; students from other countries, and especially those studying in English programmes, feel integrated rather in the community of foreign students than in the Czech student community. More than half (54%) of the students from other countries than Slovakia do not feel included among other Czech students.

A number of other aspects of living and studying in the Czech Republic were examined by the research and it‘s results were provided to the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports and to the universities participating in the survey to help them in their internationalization concept creation.

Source

In a follow up report on the Czech Republic, the Council of Europe’s anti-money laundering body MONEYVAL concludes that the country has improved measures to combat money laundering and terrorist financing, but still needs to make progress in certain areas.

Since the adoption of its mutual evaluation report in December 2018 the Czech Republic is reporting to MONEYVAL on an expedited timetable (MONEYVAL’s enhanced follow-up procedure) due to the high number of deficiencies identified in several key areas. The follow-up carried out by MONEYVAL has examined a range of legislative, regulatory and institutional measures implemented by the Czech Republic to address these deficiencies.

MONEYVAL notes progress and assigns the Czech Republic higher international compliance ratings in three key areas: the improvement of mechanisms for national cooperation and coordination to tackle money laundering and terrorism financing (ML/TF); the strengthening of countermeasures against countries and jurisdictions which represent a high ML/TF risk; and the removing of regulatory gaps for correspondent banking relationships, which will ensure greater transparency for bank-to-bank transactions.

At the same time, MONEYVAL considers that the Czech Republic had not made sufficient efforts to upgrade its ratings in two areas: financial sanctions related to terrorism, and mechanisms to track the movement of cash across borders.

The follow-up report also finds that the Czech Republic has achieved some progress in the implementation of new international requirements for virtual assets, which includes virtual currencies (e.g. Bitcoin, Ethereum) and the providers of these assets.

To date, the Czech Republic has reached a level of full compliance with five of the 40 Financial Action Task Force (FATF) Recommendations, which constitute the international AML/CFT standard. The country still has minor deficiencies in the implementation of another 24 Recommendations, and larger-scale deficiencies for the remaining 11.

MONEYVAL decided that Czech Republic will remain in the enhanced follow-up process and will continue to report back to MONEYVAL on further progress to strengthen its implementation of AML/CFT measures.

Source: Council of Europe

In the Republic of Belarus, presidential elections were held on 9 August 2020. The current President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko is the winner of the presidential elections at which he won 80.23% of the votes. The turnout at the elections was 84.23%.

However, the opposition candidates expressed their discontent over the results of the elections. Particularly, Svetlana Tikhanovskaya, who won 10.09% of the votes.

Immediately after the closing of the polling stations, citizens started the protests in order to express their discontent over the just held elections and the election results. The opposition went so far in its stances that it alleged that the opposition candidate Tikhanovskaya had won 80%, and Lukashenko only 10% of the votes.

Analysts believe that while the just held elections were not ideal, had some shortcomings and could have been conducted in different atmosphere and conditions, an inverse election result is practically impossible bearing in mind the organization of Belarus, its political modus operandi and the sentiments of the electorate.

Belarus at geopolitical crossroads

Belarus is a country with numerous specificities. Its geopolitical position is a kind of a geopolitical crossroads between EU and NATO countries, Russia as it biggest neighbor and Ukraine. Poland, Lithuania and Latvia, all EU and NATO members, have their historical memory and interests, which at any moment could spark tensions and/or conflict. On the other side, the relations with Russia have never been ideal. Namely, Russia has viewed developments in Belarus as developments in its own backyard, because it believes that through Belarus the West and NATO were attempting to advance closer to the border of Russia.

As a pragmatic president, Lukashenko mainly strived to balance his policy between the West (EU) and the Russian Federation. In such a tense neighborhood Lukashenko’s pragmatic policy played an important role in the signing of the still valid peace agreement in Minsk in 2014 and 2015, on the basis of which the war conflicts in Ukraine were stopped.

Belarus is a part of a rather loose alliance of the states of Russia and Belarus, as well as a member of the collective defense alliance (ODKB), led by Russia. Russia responded to the pressures from the West with the establishment of a security integration process in the Euro-Asian territory. Firstly, in 2001, the Declaration on the Establishment of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) was signed by presidents of five independent countries from the territory of former Soviet Union and the President of the People’s Republic of China. The intention behind cooperation within the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) was establishment of a single military-security alliance.

The next step was the establishment of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (ODKB) in 2002, as a military alliance of countries of the post-Soviet territory, which included Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Armenia, Kirgizstan and Tajikistan.

Belarus between EU imperialism and Russian occupation

Reactions by EU leaders to the elections in Belarus were rushed and superficial just like in other important regional and global affairs. This justifies the stance of analysts that with such reactions and unharmonized foreign policy the EU will not be an important actor in international relations for quite some time to come.

Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission (EC) stated: “Today, we give them three clear messages. Firstly, we stand by the people of Belarus, who want fundamental freedoms and democracy. Secondly, we will sanction all those responsible for violence, repression and falsification of the results of the election. The people of Belarus took peacefully to the streets and the authorities answered with violence, and this cannot be accepted. Thirdly, we are ready to accompany peaceful democratic transition of power in Belarus.”[2]

Analysts believe that the statement by EC President Ursula von der Leyen is disputable in some aspects and particularly in the part that is related to offering of EU services in support of peaceful democratic transition, that is transition of power, because it opens the question whether there a change in the EU foreign policy had occurred- or a kind of EU imperialism. With such statements the EU interferes in the toppling of constitutional-legal order of a sovereign and independent country. The situation in Belarus should not be seen in black and white, because it is far more complex. If we do not know and understand the Soviet model, rule and reasoning, we cannot understand Belarus either. Therefore, it is necessary to be very careful and not enable interpretations that would, de facto, push Belarus into the Russian sphere of interests, which would mean creation of another failed state and frozen conflict. Therefore, the EU did not respond more strongly in the case of Belarus, because it does not wish to contribute to fulfillment of more than evident particular interests of Lithuania and Poland with respect to Belarus. In this context, it is important to warn the neighboring countries not to interfere in internal matters of Belarus.

On the other side, in the war against Georgia in 2008 and with the recognition of the breakaway provinces of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, Russia has made a convincing demonstration of its renewed power and resolve to protect its interests. It was a clear warning against further territorial aspirations of NATO, as well as a message to the US and other countries that the time when they could have almost unimpededly undertake actions to the detriment of national interests of Russia is gone. The Russian position further gained in relevance after the annexation of the Ukrainian peninsula of Crimea to Russia and the beginning of major opposition to the pro-Western policy of Kiev in the Donbas region.

Analysts believe that the EU should lead a far more responsible policy towards Belarus and get familiar in detail with the situation in the country before making a final decision. Rushed moves had already caused damage to the EU, not just in Belarus but also in the broader post-Soviet area and the West Balkans. The EU is not an ideological creation and what it can offer to others is the rule of law and legal order, which has already been brought into question in many aspects. Primarily through the actions of the Visegrád Group of states (V4) and their (re)interpretation of a legal state and human rights.

Runaway presidential candidate Tikhanovskaya

Citizens of Belarus had an opportunity to witness cases of failed states in their immediate and wider neighborhood. In example, in Georgia. The current developments in Ukraine also do not instill hope in a better outcome. That is why the citizens want to maintain peace and stability and do not want a failed state. The Soviet model has made a home in the minds of many citizens of Belarus as an expression of nostalgia for the past times. This is similar to what is happening with a part of the population in the area of former Yugoslavia who long for the life they had in the former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.

In fact, these pro-Soviet thinking and sentiments have developed a high level of patriotism among citizens, which is particularly marked in Belarus, which is why any interference from outside can generate negative effects.

According to the analysts, Presidential Candidate Svetlana Tikhanovskaya made a cardinal mistake when she chose to seek refuge in the neighboring Lithuania. Namely, Belarus has a number of political disagreements and disputes with Lithuania, particularly now when Lithuania has officially, as well, introduced sanctions against Belarus and its President Lukashenko. In fact, analysts also drew a parallel with such a situation and asked how the citizens of Serbia would respond to a situation in which a defeated presidential candidate in Serbia would find refuge in the neighboring Croatia and request from this neighboring country to be installed in power. The developments in and around Belarus show a strong engagement of the foreign factor, which strengthens the position of the current president and it is not known whether that is, actually, the goal of the West?

The above is not the only resemblance between this situation and the one in the West Balkans. With the procrastination of the negotiation process with North Macedonia and Albania, the EU has lowered its rating and the trust of the citizens. By not opening new chapters in the negotiations with Serbia during the Croatian chairmanship of the EU Council, the EU further reduced its own credibility as being the right democratic orientation for the region, which is neither good nor necessary.

The most concrete parallel can be drawn between Belarus and Montenegro. Does the EU apply double standards in its treatment of Belarus President Alexander Lukashenko and Montenegro President Milo Đukanović (DPS), whose regime has been in power for 31 years in Montenegro? Namely, Đukanović is directly connected with war crimes (1991-1995) as well as (international) crime and corruption. Furthermore, Montenegro has become a full-fledged member of NATO, which is the strongest military-political alliance and places a major emphasis on fulfillment of democratic standards. Hence, the question to be asked is will the EU recognize the results of elections in the smallest country on the Balkans, Montenegro, which will be held on 30 August 2020 and then convene an extraordinary summit of the EU to address rigged and irregular elections by Đukanović’s regime. Analysts also warn of the parallel between the Belarus leader Lukashenko and Montenegro president Đukanovića related to their long “service” in top positions in their respective countries. Specifically, the period of Đukanović’s regime is five years longer than Lukashenko’s and Lukashenko was not involved in commission of war crimes, unlike Đukanović.

Instigate internal dialogue and reforms in Belarus

Thecentral question that is inevitable and clearly being imposed here is how to begin to resolve the tense situation in Belarus. At the internal political level the situation is very complex and vulnerable and in the international context it requires a lot of fine tuning and wisdom in approach.

Analysts believe that it is important to immediately appease political passions in Belarus and initiate an internal dialogue with all social and political stakeholders. This move should be made by the current president Lukashenko and it would be a prelude to constitutional changes in the country. Repression and disregarding of the stances of the citizens can take Belarus, which factually stands between EU imperialism and possible Russian occupation, in an unwanted direction. Specifically, serious endangering of peace and stability, as well as creation of another failed state in the former post-Soviet area.

This is in no one’s interest, least of all the citizens of Belarus. Experiences of the countries that have went through the painful transition towards democratization in the period after the end of the “Cold War” show that such an internal dialogue is the only instrument to achieve democracy. In fact, that is the distinction between modern democratic states, which function on the basis of the rule of law and human rights, and the countries with autocratic and undemocratic tendencies.

All social and political actors should participate in the dialogue. The government should accept that and, at best, initiate the dialogue itself. The prevailing opinion among the analysts is that currently there is such a potential in the Belarus society and that the government, that is President Lukashenko, would be able to accept such a project and initiate the necessary reforms in the interest of citizens and preservation of the state. It is evident that Belarus wishes to keep its independence and sovereignty with respect to the political East and West, which is why it had rejected the exorbitant financial offer of the EU, because what lies behind it is the interest of the West to use Belarus to reach the Russian border. However, Belarus has the same stance with respect to Russia. In this context, every day is valuable and useful, because the raising of tensions and intensification of the conflict, reduces the potential and possibility for such a development. At the same time, preservation of Belarus as a state is the priority of all the priorities, as it can become collateral damage and a victim of a confrontation between the West and Russia.

Ljubljana/Brussels/Minsk, 25 August 2020

Footnotes:

[1] IFIMES – International Institute for Middle East and Balkan Studies, based in Ljubljana, Slovenia, has Special Consultative status at ECOSOC/UN, New York, since 2018.

[2] Source: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/hr/statement_20_1500

International Institute for Middle East and Balkan Studies (IFIMES)[1] from Ljubljana, Slovenia, regularly analyses developments in the Middle East, Balkans and also around the world. Guido Lanfranchi isan international affairs specialist based in Den Haag. In his text entitled “The future of Europe depends on its neighborhood – UfM’s Nasser Kamel says” he is summarizing the speech of Dr. Nasser Kamel, the Secretary-General of the Union for the Mediterranean (UfM), who participated in an international conference discussing the future of Europe in Vienna.

On July 1st, 2020, the Secretary-General of the Union for the Mediterranean (UfM), Dr. Nasser Kamel, participated in an international conference discussing the future of Europe. The event under the name FROM VICTORY DAY TO CORONA DISARRAY: 75 YEARS OF EUROPE’S COLLECTIVE SECURITY AND HUMAN RIGHTS SYSTEM was held at the historic setting of the eldest world’s Diplomatic Academy, that of Vienna, Austria. This gathering was organised by four partners; the International Institute for Middle East and Balkan Studies (IFIMES), Media Platform Modern Diplomacy, International Scientific Journal European Perspectives, and Action Platform Culture for Peace, with the support of the Diplomatic Academy of Vienna.

In his highly absorbing keynote, Secretary General Dr. Kamel described the impact of the C-19 event as only amplifying the old issues and long-standing challenges within the Euro-Mediterranean theater. To this end, Excellency especially focused on the economic and environmental challenges faced by the Euro-MED. He recommended that sustainability and resilience should be at the core of the post-C-19 recovery, and gave an important piece of advice to European policymakers: if Europe is to become a global power, a positive engagement with its neighborhood – both east and south – will be of paramount importance. Hostilities and confrontation should be replaced by a decisive cooperation on the common future project. And such a project should include all EU/Europe neighbors without prejudices.

Reflecting on the global impact of C-19, Excellency Kamel stated that the pandemic has pushed the world to a new era, and that the repercussions of this crisis will be extremely far-reaching – not least in terms of economic activity, which is set to dramatically decrease at the global level. As for the Euro-Mediterranean more specifically, the UfM’s Secretary General noted that the region’s existing elements of fragility – most notably the high levels of inequality and the pressing climate change emergency – are set to worsen as a result of the pandemic. To counter the ensuing negative effects, Dr. Kamel advised, resilience must be built through a holistic approach that promotes at the same time an environmental, social, and economic recovery throughout the whole Euro-Mediterranean region.

Secretary General Kamel also touched upon the economic impact of the C-19 in the Euro-Mediterranean region. This impact – he noted – has been markedly uneven, as countries that were more dependent on Asian supply chains, for instance, have been hit harder and faster than others. Starting from this observation, the UfM’s Secretary General delved into the debate about the current economic model and its typical long supply chains. While refusing frontal attacks to globalization as an outdated concept, Dr. Kamel suggested that Euro-Mediterranean countries should increase their resilience and work better to ensure the solidity of their supply chains – for instance though what he called a “proximization”, or regionalization, of these chains. On this issue –he noted– the UfM Secretariat is currently working with relevant partners, including the OECD, as to explore the potential to create regional supply chains – hoping that this could lead to tangible development gains on both shores of the Mediterranean.

Secretary-General, Dr. Kamel addressing the Vienna Conference while honoring the 25th anniversary of the Euro-MED process

Besides the oft-discussed economic issues, the Secretary General’s contribution also sought to highlight the importance of environmental considerations, which risk slipping at the bottom of the agenda in times of economic crisis. Dr. Kamel stressed that the climate crisis is a reality that the Euro-Mediterranean region must inevitably face. A report developed by a large group of scientists from several different countries, supported by both the UfM and the United Nations Environment Programme, has highlighted that the impact of climate change in the Euro-Mediterranean is set to be particularly significant – just to quote one statistic, the region is warming 20% faster than the rest of the world. Hence, Secretary General Kamel stressed, the region’s post-pandemic recovery must be more sustainable – more green, blue, and circular – with a focus on enhancing the resilience of societies on both shores of the Mediterranean.

In his concluding remarks, Mr. Kamel decided to stress the interconnectedness of the Euro-Mediterranean region. The European continent is tightly linked to its neighborhood, he noted, both to the east and to the south. Hence, the future of Europe as a relevant economic, political, and geopolitical power depends on how proactive and engaging it will be with its immediate neighborhood – Dr, Kamel said. As for Europe to be prosperous, its neighborhood should be resilient, mindful of the environment, and more economically integrated. At the UfM – Secretary-General assured audience – that is the aim that everyone is hoping, and working, for.

In order to make the gathering more meaningful, the four implementing partners along with many participants have decided to turn this event – a July conference into a lasting process. Named – Vienna Process: Common Future – One Europe, this initiative was largely welcomed as the right foundational step towards a longer-term projection that seeks to establish a permanent forum of periodic gatherings as a space for reflection on the common future by guarding the fundamentals of our European past.

As stated in the closing statement: “past the Brexit the EU Europe becomes smaller and more fragile, while the non-EU Europe grows more detached and disenfranchised”. The prone wish of the organisers and participants is to reverse that trend.

To this end, the partners are already announced preparing the follow up event in Geneva for early October (to honour the 75th anniversary of the San Francisco Conference). Similar call for a conference comes from Barcelona, Spain which was a birthplace of the EU’s Barcelona Process on detrimental; the strategic Euro-MED dialogue.

About the author:

Guido Lanfranchi is an international affairs specialist based in Den Haag. He studied at the Dutch Leiden University and Sciences Po Paris, and working with the Council of the European Union in Brussels. His research focuses on the EU, Euro-MED and Africa.

Ljubljana/Den Haag, 22 August 2020

Footnotes:

[1] IFIMES – International Institute for Middle East and Balkan Studies, based in Ljubljana, Slovenia, has Special Consultative status at ECOSOC/UN, New York, since 2018.

Aneta Vančová, psychologist, coach and lecturer from topcoach.sk

Do you try to build a work team in your company? To have your own team is one thing but build a successful and effective team is another one. It is a sensitive matter and while doing so you must take into consideration many aspects. Read the following important steps how to proceed if you want to create and build team.

The choice of the best

The aim of managing individuals or teams is to meet the team or company’s aims, goals via utilizing each individual’s potential. It means for managers to apply different techniques, methods to meet the above-mentioned goals. And it seems to be a good idea to use a wide variety of tools, as for example the personal, performance or motivation diagnose, assessment or development centers, and so forth.

To build effective team is a long-time procedure and it already starts with selection procedure itself. Therefore, the management themselves in cooperation with HR department, should care about the good and quality selection. That allows you to choose the best ones for you and thus eliminate the ineffectivity afterwards. Mostly managers start to deal with team functioning only when something goes wrong. The right and proper choice and well-set development afterwards can prevent and save financial or capacity sources, to minimize defectiveness and increase efficiency and turnovers as well.

Based on group and team studies, the following reasons for their malfunctioning were discovered (Curphy, Hogan, 2012):

The top 10 reasons why groups and teams fail:
1. Misunderstanding the team context.
2. Lack of common purposes or goals.
3. Issue with team composition.
4. Bad fellowship.
5. Weak meeting, decision-making, and communication processes.
6. Favoritism.
7. Different levels of commitment.
8. Shortfalls in resources (funding, equipment, or authority)
9. Personal animosity and interpersonal conflicts.
10. Being unable to achieve superior results.

„Being engaged, involved“ into team culture and company

The proper choice is closely related to „team culture“. Immediately from the beginning it is crucial to follow, while building quality team, mainly the personality type as well as the work type. This applies to newly accepted people from the market as well as those chosen from the internet. We should not forget that the employee suitable in one team within certain community, does not mean that he automatically will be suitable in other team within the same community.

Effectivity is revealed when there is a concordance in company’s atmosphere, melted into management’s behavior, focused to self-fulfillment and personal growth. Psychiatrists discovered an interesting fact last century. An identified individual person, having the real feeling of being incorporated into team or group, shows signs of satisfaction and thus his work is much more effective.

Work team, the person belongs to, provides him feeling of security, allows self-fulfillment, gain reputation, recognition, and it contributes to strong feeling of fellowship. When there is no such work surrounding, it decreases one’s motivation and performance as well. And that is exactly the moment of interest for manager. When employee „fits into team“, the company’s identity comes to the forefront, reflecting effective decision making procedures at work. This should be the aim of manager to create good company’s culture and policy.

Team vs. work group: things in common vs. differences

Fulfillment of needs and motivation

MOTIVATION – the word inflected so often nowadays. We can find motivation in each area of our life, mainly in the working one. It is the main topic of our hectic life these days. It is highlighted mainly during the autumn season when due to temperature changes, we switch to routines in comparison to summer mode. Sometimes we are highly motivated, then we search motivation and sometimes we lose it. What influences our ability for work motivation?

The essential part is created by the need to belong somewhere. Further motivation forms depend on this. Each person‘s basic motivation is the social contact, no matter what aspect we take into consideration, including psychological, sociological or anthropological, we always meet this fact. The truth is that all of us need to be in touch though each on different, individual level, depending on personality type, place where we actually are or particular life situation.

Each manager and community has the same aim that is to reach results. At the same time, it is also about satisfaction of the employees themselves and this is closely connected to stated goals and their fulfillment. And knowing the employees‘ motivation, manager and finally the community can reach both and thus create effective quality team, the members of which are satisfied and reach their goals. It also involves fulfillment of needs, employee’s motivation.

What responsibilities have the manager while building and caring about his team, managing individuals and reaching the goals and tasks we will deal with in the next article.

By Aneta Vančová, psychologist, coach and lecturer from topcoach.sk

——————-

Sources:
Vančová, A. (2019). Manuál (ne)manažéra /Manual of (non)manager/. Bratislava: ADVANCA
Curphy, G. & Hogan, R. (2012). The Rocket Model. Tulsa: Hogan Press
Hayes, N. (2005). Psychologie týmové práce /Psychology of team work/. Prague: Portál.

International Institute for Middle East and Balkan Studies (IFIMES)[1] from Ljubljana, Slovenia, regularly analyses developments in the Middle East and the Balkans. IFIMES has analyzed the current developments in Montenegro with respect to the parliamentary elections that are scheduled to take place on 30 August 2020. We bring the most important and interesting excerpts from a comprehensive analysis titled “2020 Parliamentary Elections in Montenegro: End of Milo Đukanović’s Era“:

The upcoming elections, scheduled to take place on 30 August 2020, will be the eleventh parliamentary elections since introduction of a multi-party system and the fifth since Montenegro declared independence. The electoral roll contains the names of 541,232 eligible voters. Montenegro has a proportional system in which the entire country is one electoral unit. The election threshold is 3%. Simultaneously with parliamentary elections, local elections will be held in Kotor, Budva, Andrijevica and Gusinje municipalities.

The IFIMES international institute published on 9 June 2020 an analysis on developments in Montenegro titled “2020 Montenegro: Noose is tightening around Milo Đukanović” (link: https://www.ifimes.org/ba/9829).

At the parliamentary elections that will take place on 30 August 2020, Montenegrin citizens will be able to choose between 12 election lists (six coalitions and six parties): ● “Resolutely for Montenegro – DPS – Milo Đukanović“ ● “For the future of Montenegro” –Democratic Front, Socialist People’s Party, Workers’ Party, True Montenegro, United Montenegro and non-partisan individuals. ● “Peace is our nation” – Democrats, Demos, Party of Pensioners, Disabled and Restitution, Civic Movement The New Left and Society for Research of Poliy and Political Theory ● “In Black and White” – Civic Movement URA, Civic Association CIVIS, Boka Forum, Party of Justice and Reconciliation and independent candidates ● Albanian Coalition “Now is the Time” – Democratic Forum, Forca, Civic Movement Perspective and Tuzi Union ● “Unanimously” – Democratic Union of Albanians, Democratic Party (DP) and Democratic Alliance in Montenegro ● “Strong Montenegro” – Social-Democratic Party ● “Social-democrats – Ivan Brajović – We Decide Consistently “ ● “Bosniak Party – Correctly- Rafet Husović“● Croat Civic Initiative – Wholeheartedly for Montenegro!“ ● Croat Reform Party ● “Snežana Jonica – Socialists of Montenegro – To live as Yugoslavs”.

Manipulations with electoral roll

Montenegro has traditionally been faced with problems, that is manipulations, related to the central electoral roll. Analysts warn of the anomaly that a country with a population of around 622,000 has no less than 541,232 registered voters. The number of population of age from 0 to 18 is in the area of 140,000. Hence, as the eligible voters are citizens of full age (541.232), if we add to the number of citizens of full age the number of citizens of age 0 to 18, then it appears that the population of Montenegro is almost 700,000. Nongovernmental organizations have detected thousands of phantom voters on the electoral roll, as well as voters who had been registered twice and deceased voters. Furthermore, thousands of voters will have difficulties exercising their voting right due to the unlawful decisions that had transferred them to other polling stations, as a result of what many will not be able to exercise their voting right. It was also established that in the municipalities near the border a number of persons who do not have a residence in Montenegro and should have already been removed from the electoral roll are still registered as voters.

The regime adopted modifications to the Law on Electoral Roll in order to fulfill the recommendation by OSCE/ODIHR and, allegedly, prevent abuse of data from the electoral roll, because the Democratic Party of Socialists (DPS) has used excerpts from the electoral roll to record so-called “secured-votes” and voters who turned out, but also to put pressure and employ various models of vote-buying. The modifications to the law restricted public control of the electoral roll, due to what currently only the ruling DPS party, which also controls the Ministry of Internal Affairs, has full access to the central electoral roll.

Analysts warn of dubious mass issuing of (double) identification cards by the Ministry of Internal Affairs which are to be used at the upcoming elections to ensure additional votes of support to the ruling DPS. There is numerous evidence of such cases, including video recordings.

Interethnic (dis)harmony in Đukanović’s way

Milo Đukanović’s regime often boasts itself with interethnic (dis)harmony that prevails in Montenegro. Such assertions by the regime, just like many others, do not reflect the reality in this multiethnic country and are a subject of manipulations particularly designed for the international public.

It is common knowledge that almost 30% of the population (Serbs) is humiliated, disenfranchised and outcast from the social-political life, while around 20% of the population (Bosniaks and Albanians) are “hostages” of Đukanović’s regime, which uses several Bosniaks and Albanians and their families that enjoy the privileges of connections with the regime to create a false image of the level of integration of the two ethnic communities and in such a way deceive both the local and international public with respect to the alleged interethnic (dis)harmony in Montenegro. In fact, as the victims of Đukanović’s regime, in fear of threats the Bosniaks are forced to vote for their offender. Namely, there is a plethora of written evidence proving that as the then President of the Government of Montenegro Đukanović had participated in the work of the Supreme Defense Council of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and was thus affiliated with war crimes and the crime of genocide committed in Srebrenica. Hence, a reasonable question to be asked is have the Bosniaks forgotten or do they wittingly elide the fact that Milo Đukanović was one of the closest associates of Slobodan Milošević (SPS) and has remained the only senior official from the war period who has still not been prosecuted. However, there is no statute of limitations on war crimes.

The story about alleged interethnic harmony in Montenegro is a humbug of Milo Đukanović’s regime because majority of citizens live in fear and are pressured to “accept” the story about alleged interethnic harmony.

Analysts believe it is important that at the upcoming elections citizens of Montenegro get united in their differences, democratically oppose without fear from the hardened regime headed by Milo Đukanović and with a pen in their hand topple the regime so that Montenegro can finally stop being a country in which there has been no change in power for 31 years already. That is why the upcoming elections are an opportunity for the citizens to release themselves from that fear. The example of North Macedonia is proof that it is possible to topple a regime with a pen in the hand at elections. Namely, at the parliamentary elections that took place in December 2016, Macedonian citizens, united in their differences and led by the Social-Democratic Alliance of Macedonia (SDSM) and Zoran Zaev (SDSM) toppled the regime of Nikola Gruevski (VMRO-DPMNE), which has many similarities with Đukanović’s regime. One should not forget the fact that it was with the assistance of Milo Đukanović’s regime that Nikola Gruevski fled North Macedonia via Montenegro. Hence, half the population of Montenegro lives in interethnic (dis)harmony in “Đukanović’s way”.

DPS’s fabrication of adversaries

As the election campaign develops the Democratic Party of Socialists (DPS) and Milo Đukanović continue to fabricate adversaries and refer to alleged endangerment of the statehood of Montenegro by the so-called “great-Serbia” project, Serb Orthodox Church and Russia. Prof. Dr. Žarko Puhovski[2] said: “One should not forget that in the meantime Montenegro (headed by Đukanović) begun to act in the same way as Austria did after World War II. Namely, it declared itself the first victim of Milošević, just as Austria declared itself the first victim of Hitler, but not also an accomplice in the war, which is what Austria and Montenegro were in these two respective cases”. Even today, Đukanović “sells” such a policy to Bosniaks and Albanians, not just in Montenegro.

The most seasoned Albanian politician, current President of Albania and a four-time Albanian Prime Minister, Ilir Meta (LSI), recently said the following with respect to the so-called great-Serbia and great-Albania projects “great-Serbia failed, and great-Albania is not possible.”

Analysts believe that it is necessary to expose Milo Đukanović’s regime, because Montenegro is a full-fledged NATO member, which means that Montenegro should apply the highest democratic standards, as well as cultivate and promote them. However, unfortunately, Montenegro is light-years away from them. It is a hoax that Serbia wants and can attack a state that is a member of the largest and strongest military alliance in the world. The Serb Orthodox Church is older than Montenegro, which means that it cannot constitute a foreign or distracting factor. Furthermore, since the establishment of NATO in 1949, Russia has not ever attacked a NATO member country. Therefore, fabrication of adversaries is a see-through constant of Đukanović’s regime.In fact, it was after the integration of Montenegro into NATO that his image in the region began to deteriorate.

It is obvious that Đukanović’s regime does not deal with real-life problems of the citizens or the disastrous economic situation, which is just partly a result of the Covid-19 pandemic. According to the Central Bank data, at the end of July 2020, 18,540 companies and entrepreneurs were blocked in Montenegro. The revenues from the tourism season will amount to only 10% of the last year’s season. The ration of active and inactive population is unfavorable and almost equalized, particularly after the Covid-19 pandemic.

Drop in support to SD, SDP and LP

So far, Đukanović’s regime remained in power with the assistance of satellite parties, which sometimes where a part of the ruling coalition and sometime his fictitious opposition.

The publicized public opinion polls forecast a high turnout at the upcoming elections, which is to exceed 70%. The balance of forces between the regime’s ruling block and the opposition is currently in favor of the opposition. Although the DPS has unlimited financial and other resources at its disposal it could win only in case of (pre)election manipulations and election fraud.

Five years ago, two political parties Social Democrats and the current SDP were created from one satellite party (SDP).

After the last elections the SD became a part of the ruling coalition and with only two representatives in the Montenegrin Parliament it got the position of the speaker of the Parliament and two ministerial positions, which is a clear indication of political corruption. On the other side, the SDP became an opposition party. However, SDP President Draginja Vuksanović Stanković is the wife of the Chief State Prosecutor Ivica Stanković, which reminds of the modus operandi used by Slobodan Milošević and his wife Mirjana Marković. Furthermore, two years ago Draginja Vuksanović Stanković was a candidate for the position of the President of Montenegro and, formally, was one of Milo Đukanović’s contestants. Chief State Prosecutor Stanković symbolizes the hated and hardened regime, while his wife Vuksanović Stanković is allegedly the symbol of democratic opposition. Such a model of division of roles is of no surprise as Đukanović was one of the closest associates and pupil of Milošević, whose “political school” actually applied such a model, that is scenario.

Researches have shown that the inconsistencies in the actions of the SDP, SD and the Liberal Party (LP), which is in coalition with the DPS, can lead to the political “death” of these satellite parties, because they are losing the support of voters and will probably not pass the election threshold.

Analysts believe that the Bosniak and Albanian parties will face a democratic and moral test if they wish to “wash off” the stain of being the collaborators and pillars of the regime. They have an opportunity to make a democratic turn, become future-oriented and terminate any further cooperation with the DPS. Since 1991 Đukanović has also developed special relations with the Republika Srpska leadership. At the time of the sanctions against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY), Đukanović and his brother were the main war-time suppliers of Radovan Karadžić (SDS) and Ratko Mladić and supported the wartime machinery of the war criminals, which resulted in the genocide in Srebrenica.

It will not be easy for the Bosniaks and Albanians to make a turn in their policy because individuals from their parties are also involved in crimes and corruption, and some even in the war developments in Bosnia and Herzegovina, as well as Croatia, together with Đukanović.

State Department criticized the regime

The US State Department, European Union, Germany, Council of Europe, foreign embassies accredited in Montenegro, Freedom House, Transparency International, news agencies, etc. have all extended criticism of Milo Đukanović’s regime.

The report by US State Department[3], published in March 2020 on the human rights situation in Montenegro in 2019, once again criticized Đukanović’s regime for corruption and engagement of government officials in corrupt practices. It also stipulated that politicization of the state system provides fertile ground for corruption and accentuated political interference by Đukanović in media freedom. According to the Report of the US State Department, the unsolved physical attacks against journalists, political interference with the public broadcaster, smear campaigns carried out by pro-government tabloids, and unfair treatment and economic pressure from government ministries and agencies against independent and pro-opposition media remained a significant problem.Prior to the publication of the Report of the US State Department, Matthew Palmer, US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs and Special Envoy for the West Balkans appeared on the Montenegro Radio-TV Station (RTCG) and conveyed a strong warning “We would like to see successful legal proceedings against those who attacked journalists, including Olivera Lakić, who is an International ‘Woman of Courage’ Award winner. We would like to see depoliticization of the Council of your institution, the Montenegro Radio-TV Station “[4].

Montenegro without Đukanović to move speedily towards EU

The path of Montenegro towards the EU[5] was unstoppable, but is currently halted and blocked because of Đukanović. Pierre Mirel wrote an elaborate Report on the situation in Montenegro and proposed introduction of conditions for (sanctions against) Montenegro. Upon Đukanović’s departure, Montenegro will be integrated into the EU through a summarized procedure. The constant narrative that if the opposition, that is pro-Serb parties come to power, Montenegro will withdraw from NATO, which is the main election campaign thesis promoted by Đukanović and his Securitate – secret political police which lately is writing graffiti all over Montenegro in an attempt to artificially cause conflicts between Serbs and Bosniaks. Such a thesis is equal to the thesis that the US will withdraw from NATO. The thesis about the withdrawal of Montenegro from NATO if Đukanović and his DPS lose the elections is a formally and politically unsustainable thesis, particularly in the modern political and geopolitical relations. The constitution of Montenegro is crystal clear, and so are the undertaken international obligations stemming from membership in NATO.

End of Milo Đukanović’s era

Milo Đukanović has a “double mortgage”, because of his engagement in crimes and corruption, as well as war crimes. As a result, any initiative aimed at interconnecting the region, such as the “mini Schengen” initiative, which is the most important regional initiative in the past 30 years, comes under the attack of his regime. Economic prosperity does not suit the states that are, for various reasons, weak or corrupted, because economic interconnecting leads to rule of law, which the regime persistently wants to obstruct. The stumbling economy in Montenegro and corruption are an excellent example.

Milo Đukanović should have already been tried for war crimes before the tribunal in The Hague. However, there is no statute of limitations on war crimes. Justice is slow but will be achieved soon.

Analysts believe that Milo Đukanović could soon appear in The Hague as a defense witness in the trial of the current Kosovo President Hashim Thaçi. Namely, international sources are in possession of information that Đukanović will appear as Thaçi’s witness and remind that Đukanović should have appeared as a defense witness in the trial of one of the highest officials from Serbia before the International Criminal Tribunal for former Yugoslavia (ICTY) in The Haag, but he threatened the indictee’s family and the indictee later gave up on his request for Đukanović’s testimony. It is therefore reasonable to ask whether Đukanović will do the same in the Thaçi Case.

Information that Đukanović is already speaking about selling his property and ownership shares with foreigners indicates that he is trying to save the illegally acquired property. However, it is important to bear in mind that contracts on sale and/or transfer of such illegally acquired property and ownership shares can be declared null and void once the changes in power and democratization of Montenegro takes place. One should also not exclude the possibility that Milo Đukanović could seek political asylum in order to avoid prosecution, and two countries have already been identified as possible options.

Analysts believe that it is important to ensure peaceful transition of government in Montenegro, without endangering peace and stability, as that is important not just for Montenegro but also for the region. The fall of the oldest European regime, which has been in power for 31 years already, instills hope that prosperity of the West Balkans region is possible, which has not been the case so far. That is why it is important that political parties and coalitions, which consider themselves democratic and not affiliated with the regime, make a commitment before the elections that they will not enter into any coalition or arrangement with the Democratic Party of Socialists (DPS). An encouraging fact in this respect is that individuals from Đukanović’s circle have already established cooperation with the foreign factor, which gives hope that the transition of government in Montenegro will pass peacefully and without violence. The end of Milo Đukanović’s era is inevitable and will bring freedom and prosperity to the citizens of Montenegro, the region, as well as the international community, because the scope of international crime of Đukanović’s regime involving high-tariff goods is such that it has significantly damaged the budgets of many countries.

Ljubljana/Washington/Podgorica, 18 August 2020

Footnotes:

[1] IFIMES – International Institute for Middle East and Balkan Studies, based in Ljubljana, Slovenia, has Special Consultative status at ECOSOC/UN, New York, since 2018.

[2] Source: https://pescanik.net/polovan-narod-i/

[3] Source: https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/MONTENEGRO-2019-HUMAN-RIGHTS-REPORT.pdf , https://me.usembassy.gov/me/our-relationship-me/official-reports-me/

[4] Source: https://www.slobodnaevropa.org/a/metju-palmer-u-crnoj-gori/30155362.html

[5] Source: https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-enlargement/sites/near/files/20190529-montenegro-report.pdf

We are on the 1st of July 2020; post-first wave of coronavirus across the globe, and already Vienna is holding a 3-panelled diplomatic forum with over 20 guest speakers. In fact, neither reflections on human rights enhancement, nor those on the current trends in international diplomacy were ever in lockdown. On the contrary, it would appear that the COVID pandemic has allowed for some important realisations amongst scholars, thus rendering this period prolific in that respect – despite an overwhelming tendency to blend everything with our sterile economies.

What is more, Manfred Nowak, Human Rights Professor at the University of Vienna, illustrates perfectly this last point through the inspirational speech he delivered for the first panel of this July conference.

Kicking it off by a comprehensive historical overview of the political, economic, legal and social turns of the global order since the coming out of WWII, Nowak provides us with a valuable perspective as to what milestones were achieved over the years, but also as to how we got to today in terms of contemporary challenges.

The aftermath of WWII and its atrocities is marked by the birth of the UN and a deep desire on the part of the international community to eradicate fascism and condemn wars, enhance living condition standards and promote equality as well as human dignity. In this context, cooperation between States and transnational institutions flourish, human rights are consecrated through numerous texts, and the very first international criminal trials are taking place.

As the 90s come about, in parallel to the expanding radiance of human rights coupled with that of international justice and ground-breaking peacekeeping actions, it is also – and especially – the time for infectious neoliberal endorsement. And whilst the new economic orientation induced stupendous growth and precious prosperity opportunity for the BRICS countries typically, it also designed a new landscape for the international order. Driven by big transnational corporations, technological advancement, financial markets coupled with deregulation and privatization processes, other democratic aspirations such as the interdependence and indivisibility of human rights for all were soon somewhat pushed to the side-lines.

Yet, this transition is crucial since the first ‘victim’ sacrificed at the hands of a free-market economy – and its gatekeeper institutions – was none other than social welfare. We should also note that the consequent undermining of social, economic and cultural rights, as well as that of civil and political rights to an extent, is not without link to the proliferation of armed conflicts in the last decades. The weakening of States phenomenon forms an important nexus with the loss of legitimacy, trust from the people and an increased general climate of insecurity making those States prone to cycles of violence.

When bringing together those facts and the current threat our entire kind is facing, namely the collapse of our environment entailing climate migration, exhaustion of resources and endangering of our specie (to which neoliberal politics contributed to), the picture emerging is simply overwhelmingly frightening. And if the 2008 economic crash didn’t tip off and alert the public vividly enough, perhaps the on-going sanitary crisis will serve as a much needed wake-up call.

From this experience, what we have learnt so far is that in the face of a health threat, too many States – or rather their internal governance – are not equipped to respond adequately whilst the cult of consumption and the race to profit are off sided. What we have learnt so far, is that the countries who decided to cut down on public health and security have struggled the most. What we have learnt so far, is that free markets cannot do anything in such event, but State intervention and control through informed and swift decision-making can. What we have learnt so far, is that strengthened cooperation is crucial in a world where many nations depend on specific delocalized industries. But what we have also learnt so far, is that it is possible to live differently and individually adopt ethical responsible conducts, thereby adapting to new priorities to safeguard our planet as well as our future generations.

Nowark’s verdict is clear, and his proposal in line with what the experts are foreseeing: neoliberal policies are no longer adapted to our reality and therefore they should make way for social market economy models, reflecting matching and relevant values. Those would be solidarity, equality and responsibility above all. What is more, international institutions and organisations need to facilitate that transition and use their influence and resources to become key-players in the making of this new order built on mutual trust and empowered political organs. We – the world – need(s) them mobilised in this movement of uniting nations in the pursuance of a pan-European social welfare sustainable society.

I, for one, cannot help but feel hopeful that this message will resonate with all like it did with me.

About the Author:

Nora Wolf, of the Kingston and of University of Geneva is an International Politics & Economics specialist. Her expertise includes Human Rights, Humanitarian Law and International Criminal Law in an inter-disciplinary fashion for the EU and the UN-related thinktanks and FORAs.

Sam Shank, cofounder and CEO of top-rated booking app HotelTonight, is here to help make sure you never make these common mistakes upon hotel check-in or checkout.

Editor’s Note: Travel might be complicated right now, but use our inspirational trip ideas to plan ahead for your next bucket list adventure.

Travel logistics, in general, can be a major source of stress while on vacation. It’s when we’re rushing through airports, out of hotel rooms, or off to a dinner reservation that things get overlooked or lost. The easiest antidote, which is challenging when you’re in transit, is to simply slow down. Taking the extra few minutes (that you usually don’t want to spare) will help you keep everything organized on the road. There’s no reason to check out of a hotel room, finish packing, search for your travel documents, and call an Uber all at the same time. Focus on one thing at a time and give yourself room to breathe instead of over-scheduling, and you’ll ultimately avoid some of the classic mistakes travelers make.

When it comes to staying in a hotel, there are some definitive dos and don’ts to follow that will make your travels even more enjoyable. To ensure your check-in and checkout process is as smooth as possible, we called on a hotel expert: Sam Shank, cofounder and CEO of top-rated booking app HotelTonight. With Shank’s invaluable advice, we’ve outlined the 10 biggest mistakes to avoid when checking in and out of your hotel.

See the rest of the article here.

International Institute for Middle East and Balkan Studies (IFIMES[1]) from Ljubljana, Slovenia, regularly analyses developments in the Middle East and the Balkans. General (Rtd) Corneliu Pivariu is a member of IFIMES Advisory Board and founder and former CEO at Ingepo Consulting. In his comprehensive analysis entitled “What will the future look like?” he is analysing the global geopolitical evolution and its impact on the states.

● General (Rtd) Corneliu Pivariu
Member of IFIMES Advisory Board and Founder and the former CEO of the INGEPO Consulting

What will the future look like?

Motto:“As we see the way of the world and as both we and you are aware of it, the law is concerned only with those ones who are equally powerful. As it is, the powerful ones are acting in accordance with what they can do while the weak ones are suffering for what is in store for them” – Thucydides, some 2,500 years ago

Corneliu PIVARIU

A question that arises on each occasion when unexpected challenges confront a community, a country and now an entire planet. The world is in the midst of a deep existential crisis triggered imperceptibly when the bipolar world ceased to exist and the march of globalisation advanced, once that the political class has declined worldwide and it is no longer capable at finding the most appropriate solutions for the future evolution of mankind (at least in what it demonstrated since some time, and notably now).

Overall considerations

Confused by the technological and informational burst, most of the mankind neglected nature and its laws and, even more, man became their most destructive element while environmentalism is an insignificant factor, unable to essentially eliminate or diminish the wrongdoings man wrought to nature with irreparable consequences even for his own future. Man goes on behaving in ways that disregard the natural equilibriums and the intensifying imbalances of the human society contribute greatly to the – unfortunate I would say – evolution of the human society now and at least on a short and medium term.

What will the future look like? Just like we devise it or as an old Romanian saying goes “your sleep depends on the way you turn down your bed”. However, most of the world’s political class is willing to sleep in a bed turned down by others (be them other states or other transnational entities), as the political class has no meaningful solutions to the current situation, at least at this point.

The struggle for the world’s supremacy is unfolding in a quite new way since no viable solutions for new global geopolitical balances were found and the formulas that were tried proved to be unviable after the bipolar world vanished and the world became, for a short period, unipolar under the US leadership.

On this background and after the emergence of the pandemic caused by COVID-19 (the virus code-named SARS2-COV was anyway heralded at least since 2017) it has become clearer that, beside the state players represented by states, other powers with global geopolitical interests, too, operate, some of them much more powerful than numerous states, and which, due to the present international architecture, are not internationally represented and therefore they cannot act openly for promoting their specific interests.

In fact, their movements were visible already in the second half of the XXth century when the big oil corporations made their presence felt, then that of the armament industry corporations, and, during the last decades, the medical and pharmaceutical corporations (known generically as Big Pharma) as well as the corporations of the information field, the great social platforms, which won already important international positions although unrecognized by the current international architecture where the evolution of the human society is discussed, negotiated and, sometimes, decided.

While more time will elapse from the outburst of COVID-19 pandemic as well as from any other ample phenomenon, not only the opposing data are accumulating but also those data which are following and which are to outline in a not too far a future the reality about this pandemic. I will not insist on this subject but it’s more and more obvious that this global milestone will have important effects on the global geopolitical evolution directly impacting the economy (the gap between rich and poor will unfortunately widen, the concentration of capital will increase and the middle class will weaken).

Regretfully, in tandem with these political and economic aspects, an ampler campaign is under way for minimising the role of the educational process, for infringing man’s fundamental rights and freedoms, for denying the family’s role and importance, for increasing the frictions between social classes and categories to the promotion of hatred (from the old dispute between workers and intellectuals to that between young and old or between salarymen and pensioners, etc), denying the importance of human knowledge of the past and even the hatred for the dead. “Who could have ever imagined that the statues of Christopher Columbus, Cervantes or Voltaire would be destroyed or desecrated? In some areas of the globe, the current hatred covers the past as well (a past which nobody can change, be it good or bad!), today’s people hate the people of yore… who nevertheless created, invented, discovered, left enduring works. The contemporaries’ struggle with the statues is a token of intellectual poverty, of lack of culture, of definite infantilism, of losing the clear judgement„[2].

The enhanced technological development of the last decades, especially in the field of information in tandem with AI will not be, after the pandemic, as spectacular as it is estimated (nothing will be like before) but it will be induced in particular by the technological developments, 5G and 6G, Internet of Things (IoT), Artificial Intelligence (AI), and the uncontrolled actions of the human factor on the environment followed by major cataclysms. Let us not forget that the evolution of social conscience is always slower than the progress of science and technology and history proves that at least until now, all new scientific discoveries were initially applied in the military field – a destructive one, aimed at achieving certain political and military goals and only after that adapted for the civilian field.

As professor Klaus Schwab said during an on-line conference dedicated to preparing the 2021 WEF at Davos, we need a Great Reset of capitalism. In fact it is about using the opportunities offered by COVID-19 pandemic for more ambitious global changes than those promoted by the EU through Green New Deal. Or, to say it more bluntly, by using the pretext of making the world more „equitable”[3] we speak about a new Cold War between China and the US in which all the other world’s states take part. A brief analysis underscores the following probable developments.

China

COVID-19 pandemic affects the global geopolitical evolutions which are in a close interdependence with the political interests of certain great state actors as well as with the important influences and interests the non-state actors with great economic power want to promote. China is in a position to obtain a unique role globally, she has the capacity of becoming the sole world superpower at a time when the US relinquished it and, probably, at least for a decade will not recover the world weight it had at the end of the XXth century. Nevertheless, the latter has a very great military power, technological advances (yet in the field of AI China seeks to reach the US level in 2025 and to become world leader in 2030) and political influence that China outweighs only partially. The US have still a great financial and economic power as long as the dollar will be a reference currency globally.

China might take the advantage granted by the political system of a sole world leadership and take the initiative of adopting certain measures for the evolution of the global geopolitical situation as the Western democracies and the US are extremely slow in the decision-making process. On this background, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) launched in 2013 expanded and 138 states and 30 international organizations joined it so far. Even if the project will slow down for a period due to COVID-19, the pandemic created new opportunities for China and, within this framework, BRI might move the centre of gravity of the international trade (and probably of the financial system) from the US to China.

Strengthening the positions achieved in Africa and especially in the Middle East may facilitate China’s attaining the role of sole super power. If China succeeds in replacing „en doceur” Russia and Iran in Syria in the process of economic recovery, Beijing will gain an extremely favourable position not only for the Mediterranean basin but also for Europe.

It is clear that China seeks to become a dominant power globally but should take into account the mistakes of all previous „empires”, as the way it acted in Hong Kong is strongly criticized as it is the treatment of the Uyghur minority, projects and major investments in countries where repayment of due sums to Beijing are long delayed. It should take into account as well the specific problems it is confronted with domestically and which are the greatest danger for achieving and maintaining global supremacy.

I think Beijing is convinced since a long time that it has no everlasting friends or allies in its global plans, but provisional allies only for certain specific objectives when their interests are consistent. In all likelihood, the said provisional partners are convinced of all these except they will not dispose of China’s economic, financial, political and military leverages.

The USA

The domestic events triggered in the spring of 2020 in the US caused by the emotion that followed the tragic death of George Floyd and which was amplified by media brought to the forefront the Black Lives Mater movement (BLM), which emerged several years earlier and determined great social upheavals in the country. Apart from the fact that those events prove the existence of certain social and political problems as well as economic inequalities which were not appropriately addressed by the American political class during the last decades, we are certainly witnessing a political movement of the Democrats for diminishing Donald Trump’s chances of winning a new mandate in the November 2020 presidential elections. COVID-19 pandemic overlaps the US domestic events and represents the most serious challenge for the world international order lead by the US, a role president Trump pulled out to a secondary position through his slogan “America first”. A report of the Council on Foreign Relations[4] stated that the United States should focus on improving domestic policy and economic competitiveness if it wants to play an active role on the international arena. To that purpose, The US should capitalize on its relations with Canada and Mexico, to expand a much more active cooperation with its allies, to develop the partnership with Europe, to improve its relations with India, to invest in the international institutions seeking a track for resuming the relations with Russia and focussing less on the Middle East and more on Asia. The unavoidable and expanding competition with China should be certainly placed at the centre of the American foreign policy in its search for a new world order. What will be the decision or the answer of the American political class we will see after the November 2020 elections. Although the Democrats are presenting Joe Biden as a winner by far, I do not think Donald Trump is already defeated. Even if he wins, president Trump will be further confronted with a fierce domestic opposition which will hinder his actions abroad for resuming the role of the world’s leader in the competition with China.

The European Union (EU)

The EU project emerged 70 years ago in order to solve the intra-European problems, particularly for securing peace and reconciliation. The evolutions that followed turned the EU in an attractive model as the stability and prosperity it enjoyed was backed by the political and military alliance with the US and NATO’s umbrella. Besides, the European Union is an absolute necessity since no European country, be it Germany, Great Britain or France cannot at present, and much less in the future, deal with giants such as China, the US, India, Russia. That was the logic of the willing assembly of the European states in a union. Except that once it took shape, the “intelligentsia” from Brussels lived in another, illusory, world, distanced from the geopolitical reality and seemed to focus on economy, finance and utopias. They forgot or disregarded Russia’s continuous and aggressive pressure, China’s new aggression and the forceful resuming of the Islamic conquest. Furthermore, during the last 12 years, the EU went through three major crises, the financial one, the euro crisis and then the migration from the Middle East and Africa with adverse consequences to which BREXIT should be added.

At the moment, the EU goes through the crisis caused by COVID-19, which – probably too optimistic- the Vice-President in charge of co-ordinating the external action and security policy, Joseph Borrell, considers it „as a great accelerator of history”[5]. Borrell pleads for a common foreign policy of the EU whereby investments sould be made not only politically but also financially. In fact, the European foreign policy is almost non-existent and Josep Borell insists on a EU which pursues its own interests and values and avoids joining sides with one or another of the great players who intends to control the globalised world. It sounds great in theory but there is no practical sign that the EU-China meeting in the 2020 fall, which is to be held in Leipzig, will witness notable events to that purpose although the first bilateral agreement was approved recently[6] between the two sides. The declaration of the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, made on that occasion seems more interesting to me: “The Covid-19 pandemic and certain major bilateral and multilateral challenges show that the EU-China Partnership is essential, whether it’s trade, climate, technology or defending multilateralism. Yet in order that our relationship develop further, it should be based even more on rules and reciprocity so that it ensures perfectly fair rules of the game”.

Democracy and the respect for human rights are at risk and the best example is age discrimination (ageism). Although the European Commissioner for Equality – the Maltese Helena Dalli stressed in March 2020 that: “Equality and non-discrimination are human rights’ fundamental principles which govern our Union as well. No crisis allows us get estranged from these principles… There is no place for ageism in the EU…COVID-19 crisis revealed discriminating attitudes on elderly people…The European Commission is engaged in respecting all the people’s rights including those of the older Europeans all along the current crisis and that no one will be left behind… That includes the lucrative activity, social and mobility measures at the EU level”[7]. Unfortunately, not everywhere in the EU this statement was taken into account. In Romania, people over 65 were almost totally sequestered in their households during the state of emergency and were allowed 2 hours only and later 3 hours a day to go outside for supplies or other necessities. We mention here the statements of the Dutch Mark Rutte who proposes a euthanasia law for healthy 75s who feel their lives are complete[8].

Therefore, we should pay great attention to which way COVID-19 accelerates the history! At this historic stage the EU is totally dependent of the Brussels thick bureaucracy and will not be able to respond properly to the great challenges it is confronted with

Germany

“The problem of Germany is that it is too big for Europe but too small for the world”, said Henry Kissinger, while Russia, which is both European and Asian power without being dominant in either of the continents seeks to play a prevailing role worldwide. Maybe this is one of the reasons for which in the course of history the two countries cooperated closely (see the secret “Reinsurance” Treaty concluded between Germany and Russia in 1887). Let us not believe that if Germany opposed recently Russia’s re-joining G7, the Russian-German cooperation goes through critical moments.

After WWII, Germany’s evolution has been marked by certain favourable moments such as The Marshall Plan, the reunification after the fall of the Berlin Wall (which was strongly backed by the US on the background of a weakened Soviet Union even if France and Great Britain were reluctant), the EU’s expansion to the East and the creation of euro.

On this background and especially after Donald Trump became president, it was obvious that Germany adopted a strategic repositioning with regard to the US which is seen by the German foreign minister Heiko Mass as a repositioning of the entire Europe.

With reference to the way Berlin will reposition Germany with regard to Russia, China, Eastern Europe and the trans-Atlantic relations the conclusions of professor Carlo Masala[9], after Chancellor Angela Merkel delivered a speech at the Konrad Adenauer Foundation on May 27th, 2020 are interesting. The first one is that Berlin does not want to adopt a tough line in its relations with China and stressed that the EU has a strategic interest in this relationship and that it will be a priority for the German government. Secondly, for Germany its relationship with Russia takes precedence over the relations with the Eastern Europe. And thirdly, there is a fracture in the trans-Atlantic relations even if Chancellor Angela Merkel indicated that Europe’s most important partnership is with the United States. We notice that the relationship with the US was „degraded” from the “most important friend outside the EU” – as the political manifesto of the CDU of 2017 states – to that of „partner”. The actual status of the relations between Germany and the US has been illustrated recently by Washington’s decision of withdrawing 11,900 military from Germany (as a result of Berlin’s refusal to increase the military spending to 2% of GDP) who will be relocated partly in Italy and Belgium, others will be returned to the US (Poland offered to accommodate these troops but the US probably does not want to further sensitize Russia with such a decision).

While Russia and China have presidents, who provide stability on a long term in their foreign policy, Chancellor Merkel is about to step down in August 2020.Her successor, no matter who will be, doesn’t seem to dispose of a comparable political stature to Merkel’s or to other competitors.

Russia

After the 25th June – 1st of July 2020 referendum when 78.56% of participants voted „Yes”, president Vladimir Putin made sure he may remain president until 2036. If until 2010 Moscow sought to be at least equal to Washington worldwide, circumstances have changed as the Kremlin is aware of the shifts occurring and will manifest at the international level. A document of the well-known Valdai organisation stresses the global geopolitical dangers in 2020: the risk that the US and China severe the cooperation considering that the two countries represent 40% of the global GDP; resuming another type of Cold War which will fundamentally change the economic international relations; the decline of the economic integration; Artificial Intelligence (AI) will become a new line of geopolitical competition; rise of populist movements; citizens’ profound discontent as a result of their disapproval of the way the governments deal with the economic and social challenges and that led to protests worldwide and weakened the governments’ ability to adopt appropriate measures. The challenges, categorized in four chapters are considered to be: Geopolitical/economic (the exacerbation of economic confrontations, the protectionism in trade and investment fields, the downturn of the great powers); environmental (global warming, the destruction of natural ecosystems, the water crisis); technological (cyber-attacks on infrastructure and financial institutions, losing private life); social (polarization of domestic policy, social stratification, loss of confidence in media outlets, the dominance of fake news).

Although Russia appears currently, at a first sight, at a certain advantage, it is confronted with two important problems: the demographic decline and the collapse of the oil price (as a renowned analyst said – and I quote roughly – at over 100 dollars the barrel Russia is a superpower and, under this level, it is an ordinary power).

In an analysis of the post-global order, Alexadr Dughin assessed that the leading elite existing in Russia who took shape during late Soviet times and in post-Soviet times do not meet at all the current chanllenges as they are the heirs of the bipolar and unipolar (globalist) order and of the thinking associated to it, as Russia is strongly connected to the globalist structure and the urgency on a short run is to establish a new and irreversible post-global world order.

India

The fifth world’s economy with more than one billion people, India is a world power in the making and a potential superpower. It benefits from an international influence on the rise and has in important say about global problems yet it is confronted with serious economic and social problems as a consequence of centuries of colonial exploitation.

India’s main strategic partners are the Russian Federation, Israel, Afghanistan, France. Certain analysts estimate that Israel will replace Russia in what concerns both the strategic partnership and armament deliveries.

Ever since achieving independence, India sought to be autonomous from foreign powers but China’s repeated incursions in the border area in the Himalayas forced it to seriously consider two options: alignment with China or search for a broader international coalition able to break its neighbour’s geopolitical ambitions.

It is expected that in the future India’s preponderance on the international arena and its role in the new international order to be significantly on the rise.

Turkey

“Those who believe that we wiped out of our hearts the lands we withdrew with tears in the eyes one hundred years ago are wrong”, president Recep Tayyip Erdogan declared at mid-February, 2018, and that is probably the most evocative declaration which outlines the political vision of the current leader in Ankara for Turkey’s foreign and military policy for the coming years. Turkey’s foreign policy has yet to find the best solution between the anti-Western fluctuations and the neo-Ottoman dream of regional hegemony, on the one hand, and the need of good relations with the European Union, the US, China and even Iran, on the other.

Under Erdogan’s leadership, Turkey is determined to maximize its geopolitical position and role benefitting from the hesitations of the great international players. It is difficult to estimate to what extent it will achieve these plans, however it plays a more and more important role the Middle East equation (Syria) and North Africa, including in the Mediterranean.

Romania in COVID-19 pandemic

Romania’s evolution in the first half of 2020 was marked, as it was the case with the other countries in the world, by COVID-19 pandemic with certain specific notes, some of them I would have not wanted to happen and which I will present in brief. The Romanian political class proved again its weak capacity of properly managing the situation and no positive significant evolutions were recorded in comparison to the previous analysis[10], and the political actions were strongly influenced by the prospect of local elections (already postponed for 27th of September, a uncertain date at the time of writing these lines) and parliamentary ones. Moreover, through their behaviour toward the population, the political class proves that the 50 years of communist dictatorship continue to have strong influences. The great majority of politicians consider themselves our masters (yet we are guilty as well when accepting this behaviour) and act accordingly (during the alert status the president spoke several times on TV and his warning gestures were accompanied by directing his fingers to the audience), and the speeches of many dignitaries were full of cautionary words (a understatement for treats) and strengthened the feeling of distinction (they – the elected ones who are allowed everything; we, the mob, are to be subdued and not to think). Incidentally, and this is probably a European record, during the first two months of the state of emergency, 120 million euro worth of fines were handed down and the compulsory actions are considered (at least this is what results from public declarations) a main modality of fighting the pandemic. It would seem thus that the population is very unruly and do not observe laws and rules but the truth is that the Romanians, in their great majority, as it is in the case in other European states, observe the legislation and the rules imposed by the authorities. The shortcomings of the education, which is a long process yet almost completely neglected during the last decades, are nevertheless taking their toll.

The danger represented by the pandemic is uninspiringly exaggerated (SARS2-COV virus certainly exists and makes victims, no doubt about it) but the statistics present errors and are not convincing, while recognizing those errors comes late and that increases the lack of confidence and the lack of transparency contributes further to the lack of confidence. The authorities were late in recognizing that 94% of the deceased registered as deaths due to COVID-19 were suffering of at least another comorbidity. Forbidding the autopsies for establishing the causes of deaths[11], under the childish and untrue pretext of the danger of disseminating the virus was another reason for the lack of confidence.

As I said, age discrimination during the first period of the emergency state was obvious as Romania was the only European country where those over 65 years of age were allowed to come out of the households 2 hours only and later 3 hours only a day, in a time interval fixed by the authorities and that was a measure nobody apologized for afterwards. Among the important personalities of the country it was only the president of the Romanian Academy, Ioan-Aurel Pop, who had a clear position of condemning this measure[12], a measure which should have rallied a much bigger number of people than it did. The discrimination goes on by the non-observance of the pensions law which provides for their increase as of the 1st of September, a law the president announced already the government cannot observe as a consequence of the economic situation created by the epidemic. Having in mind that in Romania pensions represents around 8% of the GDP (in the EU’s member states it represents 12%) and the pensions indexation with the inflation provided for by law have to be enacted every year in January, that has been enacted in 2019 in September only and no news of it in 2020 so far. “Nothing is more valuable than old men’s advice”, as the old Romanian saying goes, and that was often used with pride until some decades ago. It seems that they wish to replace it by the syntagma „Let he who has old people around him kill them”.

We register violations of the human rights and liberties with a frenzy worth a better cause in the new law No. 136/2020, “through which the physician recommends your lock-down, the physician decides your confinement, the physician recommends the prolongation of your confinement… you cannot leave the location where you have been forcefully locked-down… The physician replaced even the judiciary and might deprive you of freedom, no matter what you wish[13]”.

During this time, deforestation goes on unhindered (three hectares an hour according to December 2019 data), in spite of the EU warnings, the number of unemployed comes close to 900,000 people, the economy registers losses on which the authorities do not offer a clear situation and the foreign loans reached around 10 billion Euro in the first half of 2020.

It seems that among state institutions the Constitutional Court and the Ombudsman only remained defenders of the human rights and freedoms in Romania.

The pandemic revealed another sad truth: the Romanian state is not able to secure employment for the existing workforce. In full state of emergency, thousands of Romanian travelled by chartered planes to Germany – which was in its turn affected by the pandemic – to harvest asparagus (what they were doing since many years), Austria made available a special train for bringing back the social caretakers from Romania. That way, the situation of tens of thousands of Romanians working in the farms and slaughterhouses in Germany, the Netherlands and Great Britain, the caretakers in Austria and Italy, the harvesters of strawberries in Spain were revealed to the general public. The Romanian government did not react on the subject; probably our politicians do not realize that they may reach the point of being treated at the Brussels headquarters the way the Romanian workers are treated abroad.

I conclude optimistically with the promises of president Klaus Iohannis made at the 29th of July press conference: “We had a meeting on the issue of the European funds. We discussed the ways Romania can turn to better use the European funds worth 80 billion euro. We determined the priority domains. We want Romania to prosper and that can be done only through huge investments. Our top priority is investing in the infrastructure. We have funds for highways and railroads, to modernize the energy infrastructure, for investing in education and health.”

Authorities offered us so far many promises and spoke always about the future: we’ll do, we’ll prepare, we are about to, in a short time. We will see what the future has in store for us, yet we should not adopt a passive attitude. A coagulation factor for moving things forward, to the better, must be created.

Education, economic development and democracy should be Romania’s three main action fields in the future and not petty political behaviour with no vision.

Short conclusions

The COVID-19 pandemic seems to hasten the evolution towards multilateralism yet it will not be achieved in an idyllic way but through a global competition for power, influence and resources where the resentments and historical frustrations feeding the desire to revenge cannot be neglected.

The observance of the human individual rights and freedoms, which were agreed upon and formalized in the UN Charter after WWII, remain entirely valid yet they are at risk and the mistakes of the past must not be repeated.

The states and the markets will witness new changes in the political and economic fields in a way which will be noticeable only in time and, for instance, many corporations relocate their production facilities from China. Inequalities will grow and new failed states will emerge.

It will be not difficult for China, under the current circumstances, to become the sole world superpower yet the problem is how long will it succeed in maintaining that position. Multilateralism will win in the end.

The shortcomings of the educational process globally will be obvious, yet AI will contribute to taking over many activities performed currently by people with important existential consequences (it is foreseen already for 2020 worldwide that the number of employees will decline by 25 million as a result of the AI development).

The development of 5G and 6G communications and of IoT will have important effects on the evolution of not only the interhuman relations but also of the international ones. There is a danger that these developments be used for curtailing the human rights and for unacceptable intrusions in the private life.

I believe that opting between being and having is vital for the mankind’s evolution and future and this is why I retake here president Emil Constantinescu’s conclusion[14]: “Politics in the knowledge society and in the globalised world of the future should be constructed as a complex vision on the future, based on a new dialogue about the human values. The current global medical crisis, which brought to the forefront not our wealth but our life, dictates us brutally to opt between having or being. The creation of a new arbitration between power and knowledge is needed to reconfigure a framework in which each individual be able not only to be but also to become”.

Anyway, Thucydides wad right some 2,500 years ago, is right now and will be probably right on a long-term future.

About the author:

Corneliu Pivariu is a highly decorated two-star general of the Romanian army (Rtd). He has founded and led one of the most influential magazines on geopolitics and international relations in Eastern Europe, the bilingual journal Geostrategic Pulse, for two decades. General Pivariu is member of IFIMES Advisory Board.

Ljubljana/Bucharest, 13 August 2020

Footnotes:

[1] IFIMES – International Institute for Middle East and Balkan Studies, based in Ljubljana, Slovenia, has Special Consultative status at ECOSOC/UN, New York, since 2018.

[2] Ioan-Aurel Pop, president of the Romanian Academy in an interview granted to Gazeta de Cluj magazine, 2020.

[3]The states and international organizations strived so much to make the world a better place so that now a new billionaire emerges every two days and the income of the richest 2,200 billionaires increased by 12% annually; 1% of the richest people of the planet own incomes equal to those of the poorest 3.8 billion people in the world.

[4]The End of the World Order and American Foreign Policy, Council Special Report no.86, May 2020

[5] Speech delivered at the Annual reunion of Germany’s ambassadors, 2020.

[6] Agreement between the EU and China on Geographical Indexes (IG), approved on July 20th afte almost 10 years of negotiations

[7] https://www.age-platform.eu/policy-work/news/eu-commissioner-equality-reaffirms-older-persons-rights-time-covid-19

[8] https://www.dutchnews.nl/news/2020/07/euthanasia-law-proposed-for-healthy-over-75s-who-feel-their-lives-are-complete/

[9] Carlo Masala, professor of international policy at Bundeswehr University, Munchen

[10] https://corneliupivariu.com/romania-la-101-ani-de-la-crearea-statului-national-unitar/

[11] Decision of the National Center for Monitoring and Controlling the Communicable Diseases (CNSCBT): “Death of a pacient confirmed with COVID-19 can not be attributed to a preexisting disease (e.g. cancer, hematological conditions, etc) and COVID-19 should be reported as cause of death, no matter the pre-existing medical conditions that might be suspected of favoring the COVID-19 severe evolution. COVID-19 should be mentioned on the death certificate as cause of death for all deceased persons to whom COVID-19 caused or is supposed to have caused or contributed to death.”

[12] His article The Dangerous Old People was published on the Academy’s site and was taken over by several daylies.

[13] http://teopal.ro The Tragedy of the Romanian Citizen: You Are Sick, You Are Guilty!

[14] Emil Constantinescu, President of Romania, 1996-2000, President of the Berlin Academy of Cultural diplomacy. The world medical crisis – a historical chance for a new global political project

On July 1st, 2020, the Secretary-General of the Union for the Mediterranean (UfM), Dr. Nasser Kamel, participated in an international conference discussing the future of Europe. The event under the name FROM VICTORY DAY TO CORONA DISARRAY: 75 YEARS OF EUROPE’S COLLECTIVE SECURITY AND HUMAN RIGHTS SYSTEM was held at the historic setting of the eldest world’s Diplomatic Academy, that of Vienna, Austria. This gathering was organised by four partners; the International Institute for Middle East and Balkan Studies (IFIMES), Media Platform Modern Diplomacy, European Perspectives Scientific Journal, and Action Platform Culture for Peace, with the support of the Diplomatic Academy of Vienna.

In his highly absorbing keynote, Secretary General Dr. Kamel described the impact of the C-19 event as only amplifying the old issues and long-standing challenges within the Euro-Mediterranean theater. To this end, Excellency especially focused on the economic and environmental challenges faced by the Euro-MED. He recommended that sustainability and resilience should be at the core of the post-C-19 recovery, and gave an important piece of advice to European policymakers: if Europe is to become a global power, a positive engagement with its neighborhood – both east and south – will be of paramount importance. Hostilities and confrontation should be replaced by a decisive cooperation on the common future project. And such a project should include all EU/Europe neighbors without prejudices.

Reflecting on the global impact of C-19, Excellency Kamel stated that the pandemic has pushed the world to a new era, and that the repercussions of this crisis will be extremely far-reaching – not least in terms of economic activity, which is set to dramatically decrease at the global level. As for the Euro-Mediterranean more specifically, the UfM’s Secretary General noted that the region’s existing elements of fragility – most notably the high levels of inequality and the pressing climate change emergency – are set to worsen as a result of the pandemic. To counter the ensuing negative effects, Dr. Kamel advised, resilience must be built through a holistic approach that promotes at the same time an environmental, social, and economic recovery throughout the whole Euro-Mediterranean region.

Secretary General Kamel also touched upon the economic impact of the C-19 in the Euro-Mediterranean region. This impact – he noted – has been markedly uneven, as countries that were more dependent on Asian supply chains, for instance, have been hit harder and faster than others. Starting from this observation, the UfM’s Secretary General delved into the debate about the current economic model and its typical long supply chains. While refusing frontal attacks to globalization as an outdated concept, Dr. Kamel suggested that Euro-Mediterranean countries should increase their resilience and work better to ensure the solidity of their supply chains – for instance though what he called a “proximization”, or regionalization, of these chains. On this issue –he noted– the UfM Secretariat is currently working with relevant partners, including the OECD, as to explore the potential to create regional supply chains – hoping that this could lead to tangible development gains on both shores of the Mediterranean.

Secretary-General, Dr. Kamel addressing the Vienna Conference while honoring the 25th anniversary of the Euro-MED process.

Besides the oft-discussed economic issues, the Secretary General’s contribution also sought to highlight the importance of environmental considerations, which risk slipping at the bottom of the agenda in times of economic crisis. Dr. Kamel stressed that the climate crisis is a reality that the Euro-Mediterranean region must inevitably face. A report developed by a large group of scientists from several different countries, supported by both the UfM and the United Nations Environment Programme, has highlighted that the impact of climate change in the Euro-Mediterranean is set to be particularly significant – just to quote one statistic, the region is warming 20% faster than the rest of the world. Hence, Secretary General Kamel stressed, the region’s post-pandemic recovery must be more sustainable – more green, blue, and circular – with a focus on enhancing the resilience of societies on both shores of the Mediterranean.

In his concluding remarks, Mr. Kamel decided to stress the interconnectedness of the Euro-Mediterranean region. The European continent is tightly linked to its neighborhood, he noted, both to the east and to the south. Hence, the future of Europe as a relevant economic, political, and geopolitical power depends on how proactive and engaging it will be with its immediate neighborhood – Dr, Kamel said. As for Europe to be prosperous, its neighborhood should be resilient, mindful of the environment, and more economically integrated. At the UfM – Secretary-General assured audience – that is the aim that everyone is hoping, and working, for.

In order to make the gathering more meaningful, the four implementing partners along with many participants have decided to turn this event – a July conference into a lasting process. Named – Vienna Process: Common Future – One Europe, this initiative was largely welcomed as the right foundational step towards a longer-term projection that seeks to establish a permanent forum of periodic gatherings as a space for reflection on the common future by guarding the fundamentals of our European past.

As stated in the closing statement: “past the Brexit the EU Europe becomes smaller and more fragile, while the non-EU Europe grows more detached and disenfranchised”. The prone wish of the organisers and participants is to reverse that trend.

To this end, the partners are already announced preparing the follow up event in Geneva for early October (to honour the 75th anniversary of the San Francisco Conference). Similar call for a conference comes from Barcelona, Spain which was a birthplace of the EU’s Barcelona Process on detrimental; the strategic Euro-MED dialogue.

About the author:

Guido Lanfranchi is an international affairs specialist based in Den Haag. He studied at the Dutch Leiden University and Sciences Po Paris, and working with the Council of the European Union in Brussels. His research focuses on the EU, Euro-MED and Africa.

By Guido Lanfranchi

The oldest restaurant in the world has served both Mozart and Clint Eastwood.

Every year there’s some new food trend that seems to sweep the internet. Remember when cupcakes were all the rage? Rainbow grilled cheeses? How about the cronut? But some meals are bigger than trends. And most of those long-lasting dishes can be found in a few of the oldest restaurants in the world.

In a time when restaurants seem to come and go with the seasons, there are a few standout stars that have somehow stood the test of time. And we’re not talking a few decades — we’re talking a few centuries.

NetCredit, a financial services provider, waded into the historical waters and created a list of the oldest restaurants in more than 115 countries around the globe. To reach its conclusion, it simply used the qualification that a restaurant is “still serving today,” meaning it could have changed hands, names, or gone through renovations since its opening day. It then looked through records and historical data to formalize its list of the 10 oldest restaurants in the world.

Coming in at the number 10 spot is Gostilna Gastuž, a restaurant that has been serving food in Slovenia since 1467. According to NetCredit, it’s long been famous for mushroom soup and buckwheat porridge.

Honke Owariya in Japan landed at number nine on the list. It’s been doling out its famous soba made with mushrooms, egg, shrimp tempura, nori, leeks, and daikon since 1465.

The eighth-oldest restaurant on the list is Hotel Gasthof Löwen, located in Liechtenstein. It’s served happy patrons veal with vegetables since 1380. It’s closely followed by the seventh-oldest restaurant, The Sheep Heid Inn in Scotland, which has served steak and roasted mushrooms since 1360.

See the list here.

When defining anything as “the best,” retirement destinations included, it’s necessary to understand the criteria along with considerations of personal needs and tastes. To some, the best is the most luxurious and indulgent regardless of price. To others, the best means value — getting the most for bang for your buck. The best climate, scenery, location, health care, and things to do also come into the picture.

Many international islands offer incentives to retirees and welcome them as long as they can prove a minimum amount of income or savings. Both local and U.S. taxes are a consideration, and American citizens should be sure to understand the IRS requirements. The U.S. Department of State offers a checklist on retiring abroad as well as access to visa requirements and specific information for other countries. The U.S. State Department travel advisories page is another useful resource, as is STEP (the Smart Traveler Enrollment Program). Since Medicare does not apply overseas, retirees living abroad must think about arrangements for health coverage, prescriptions, and availability of medical care.

It’s a good idea to take a lengthy vacation on any of the islands to get a feel for housing and daily living costs, social life, quality of medical care, language, infrastructure, transportation, and safety. Issues such as unreliable Wi-Fi, electrical blackouts, traffic, and unavailability of familiar products are minor inconveniences to some and game changers to others.

For the adventurous or retirees seeking a change of scenery, lifestyle, or a more economical place to settle, we have rounded up some ideas. More research is recommended, of course, before you start packing up and planning your farewell parties, but these islands may get you thinking about your future home.

See the slideshow here.

We are pleased to share with you this special message for the 20th Anniversary of Humanitas Afrika and coronavirus pandemic fundraising campaign video.This is the first time we are coming out openly and officially to ask for your kind voluntary support and that of the general public.Until now we have worked through our own efforts and initiatives and private donations.The coronavirus pandemic has affected almost every person and country globally we are aware and our situation as a small but important organisation has become even more difficult.Because of the current situation we cannot celebrate our many achievements and postive and impacting contribution to Czech,Eiropean and African socities.

But the work we do in bringing peoples and cultures together becomes even more neccessary during and after the coronavirus crisis.The working phylosophy of Humanitas Afrika has been and still is UBUNTU – an African phylosophy simply translating as I AM BECAUSE YOU ARE AND YOU ARE BECAUSE I AM. We think going forward, the world would need more UBUNTUS to heal and revive itself again.

The message is in English and Czech.Thank you for your favourable consideration and kind support.With your support and together we will contribute our part to make our beautiful world a better place for all humanity.

We wish you good health and happiness.

Afrikatu Kofi